Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-03-28 Info Packet City of iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: 14arch 7, 1995 TO: City Council (memo for record) FROM: City Manager RE: Material Sent to Council Only Copy of letter from the City Manager to the Chair of the'Board of Supervisors regarding a special census. Memorandum from the City Manager regarding request for traffic count information. Memorandum from the Assistant Director of Planning and Community D~velopment regarding public hearing format for Melrose Avenue Environmental Assessment/Alternatives Analysis. Memorandum from the Director of Parking and Transit regarding interior painting of the Capitol and Dubuque Street Parking Ramps. Memorandum from the Personnel Administrator regarding City Assessor's office salary study. Copy of letter from the Senior Housing Inspector to Claude Williams regarding the Apartment Owners Association meeting. Building permit information for February 1995, Invitation from Northwest Junior High School to attend the Annual Global Issues Conference. Article from the February 27, 1995, issue of Water Week. Letter from R. Alberts regarding funding for the Senior Center. Memoranda from the City Manager: a. Mayor's Youth Employment b. Federal Budget Cuts c. Pending Development Issues Inforhation distributed 3/7/95 regarding teletommunications legislation~l.~ Information regarding Economic Development Policy. March 3, 1995 Charles Duffy, Chair Board of Supervisors 913 S. Dubuque Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 CITY OF I0 WA CITY Dear Charlie: Currently, the City of Iowa City is preparing to submit a request to the U.S. Census for a cost estimate for a special census. Before completing our request, we wanted to check with the County to determine if there was an interest in submitting a joint request for the City and County for a special census for the entire county. Whether or not the City decides to have a special census conducted will depend upon the cost of the special census compared to the additional revenues that would be generated from populatiombased funding sources, such as the road use tax. I assume the County would weigh its decision on similar criteria. If you are interested in pursuing the cost estimate, the Census Bureau requires that the following information be included in the cost estimate request: Name/description of census area Estimated current population Current number of housing units Number of non-traditional housing facilities -- including prisons, colleges, etc. Name, telephone number and fax number of contact person Check for 9200 payable to "Commerce/Census" Preferred or required time schedule Any special information to be collected -- standard speclal census includes information about housing composition and population composition by census tract. Please contact me with your thoughts regarding a request for a cost estimate for a special census for Johnson County. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Stephen J. Atkins City Manager cc: City Council; Karin Franklin David Schoon Marian Karr City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 3, 1995 City Council City Manager City Council Request for Traffic Count Information Jim asked if we had any traffic count information available for the portion of the street system we functionally classify as "local" (as opposed to arterial or collector). His interest is in seeing the range of Average Daily Traffic volumes on the local street system, and how they compare with our design standard of 1,000 vehicles per day or less. Unfortunately, we have virtually no data available for the local system. Our traffic volume recording eftotis are concentrated almost entirely on the arterial-collector system. The only local system counts we have are those areas where we have been asked by neighborhood representatives to verify a perceived high traffic volume situation. The north side and the Harlocke-Weeber area are two such examples. I believe these few locations will not provide the range of information Jim is looking for. To gather more local street system Average Daily Traffic data will require Traffic Engineering to schedule a program over several months, and will supplant our arterial-collector data gathering. I spoke with Jim Brachtel and he will identify 20-30 local streets for counts. I instructed him to proceed. Incidentally, the highest volume local street system traffic counts that Jim or Jeff could recall were in the 700-1,000 vehicles per day range. They could not recall any locations on the local street system over 1,000. cc: Jim Brachtel Jeff Davidson index~c~t~alcount Date: To: From: Re: City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Steve Atkins, City Manager Jeff Davidson, Assistant Director, Department of Planning and Community Development Public Hearing Format for Melrose Avenue Environmental Assessment/Alternatives Analysis BRW Inc., our Melrose Avenue environmental assessment consultant, has finalized the format for the public hearing on the Environmental AssessmentJAItematives Analysis report. Consistent with the entire EA process, the public hearing will be held in a format which fulfills the requirements for a federal environmental assessment. The format proposed by BRW has been approved by the Federal Highway Administration and the Iowa Department of Transportation. The public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 19 in conjunction with the public comment period which will extend between March 14 and May 8. On the evening of April 19 BRW has reserved meeting Rooms A and C at the Iowa City Public Library. This time and location has been selected because it is a night with a minimal number of conflicts with other public meetings and University events, it is a location accessible to persons with disabilities, and has convenient parking. The date and location of the hearing will be advertised in a legal notice, press releases, and other promotional activities conducted by BRW. As I have outlined previously, BRW will handle transmittal of the draft report to the required agencies and individuals, provide copies to area public libraries, and provide a summary report available to the public. BRW will make a brief presentation at the beginning of the public hearing. They will address the format for the public hearing, the project history, outline the project alternatives, and summarize the results of the environmental assessment process. Following the presentation, BRW representatives will be available to informally discuss the project in Meeting Room A. A court reporter will be located in Meeting Room C to receive and transcribe official oral comments on the environmental assessment report. This format has been used successfully to reduce the amount of antagonism and intimidation at the hearing. Any person who wishes to make a formal oral comment regarding the environmental assessment repod will do so in front of the court reporter on an individual basis in Meeting Room C. BRW will bring all of the necessary materials to the public hearing (sign-in sheet, request to speak cards, response sheets, agenda, etc.) and conduct the hearing. City staff will also be available at the hearing to answer questions. Persons unable to attend the April 19 hearing will have the opportunity to forward comments during the public comment period and be part of the official record. Following the close of the review and comment period, BRW will assemble the comments made, and make a recommenda- tion to the City regarding the appropriate responses. The Environmental Assessment/Alternatives Analysis report will them be finalized and submitted to the Federal Highway Administration in May, As I have indicated previously, FHWA will make a determination of a Finding of No Significant Impact, or require us to conduct an Environmental Impact Study. Following the Federal action we will be able to proceed with our local decision-making. Let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter. cc: Rick Fosse City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 27, 1995 To: Stephen Atkins, City Manager From: Joe Fowler, Director Parking & Transit Re: Interior Painting - Capitol and Dubuque Street Ramps At Council's direction. the Parking Division began exploring painting the interior walls and ceilings of the Capitol and Dubuque Street parking ramps. Engineering was contacted and expressed concerns that painting would trap moisture inside the pre-cast sections and result in future damage to the ramps as a result of freeze/thaw cycles. Upon Engineering's recommendation, Shive-Hattery, Engineers & Architects, were contacted. Shive-Hattery has provided engineering services to the City for parking ramp maintenance for the last ten years. They are very familiar with the physical condition and usage patterns of both facilities. After reviewing the proposed painting and evaluating the desired end product, they concluded that the painting of the interior is possible if the correct products are used and instructions followed. However, they do not recommend this course of action. This recommendation was based on the following: 1) the decks are not watertight and leaking water will stain the ceilings, 2) exhaust, grime, and cobwebs will be more evident on the painted surfaces, 3) painted surfaces will encourage graffiti, 4) continued upkeep of the facilities (yearly painting), and 5) painting may have an adverse effect on public opinion if it is not kept immaculately clean. As an alternative to painting, Shive-Hattery recommends an engineering study to evaluate the following: 1) changing light fixtures or lenses, and 2) increasing the density of lighting. This study could be expanded to include interior signage, The end result could be facilities similar to Chauncey Swan - a brighter interior with multi-colored signs to indicate parking levels and exits. Either course of action, the painting or the lighting study, can be undedaken at this point. Due to the continued maintenance commitment painting will require, I believe the option of lighting and signs should be explored before a final decision is made. bc4-2 Human Relations/Personnel Internal Memo DATE: March 7, 1995 TO: i~OM: RE: Stephen $. Arkins, City Manager Sylvia A. Mejia, Personnd Adrninistrator~'~/ City Assessor's Offic~ Salary Study I met with Dan Hudson last we~k to review the classification/compensation plan, or lack thereof, of the City Assessor's staff. I explained the process that the City went through ns we reviewed our positions in relationship to each other within the organi:~.ation and we agreed this process would work for the Assessor's staff as well. We discussed the need to develop job descriptions for the. positions in the Assessor's office. We agreed to use the imtmment the City used (Job D~cfipfion Questionnaire) ns the basis for the job descfiptiom and the internal comparisons as well. We would then use this information to compare these positions to others within the City and/or other City Assessor's offices. Due to the heavy workload in the Assessor's office, we agreed to conduct this study this summer with the goal of completing it this fall. The information will then be available to the Conference Board when they meet to discuss the budget for th~ Assessor's office. Please let me know if this meets with your approval. cc: Dan Hudson February 28, 1995 '{ CITY OF I0 I4/A CITY Claude Williams 626 Diana Ct. Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Apartment Owners Assoc. Meeting Dear Claude: The purpose of this letter is to supply for you a proposed agenda for presentation at the meeting March 21, 1995. Our staff has discussed this and we are suggesting the following topics, which we hope will be of interest to local landlords. We are suggesting five to ten minute presentations for each topic, with time at the end for questions. State of Iowa Fire Code as it relates to existing residential structures, by John Bovey. Discussion of lead base paint, current regulations and abatement techniques. Also other toxins which could become housing issues, by Steve Burns. 3. Tree and refuse regulations, by Art Anderson, 4. Electrical Code for existing structures, by Gary Klinefelter. This is simply a suggested agenda. If you have other topics to suggest please feel free to contact me. I believe these are in line with the general theme you suggested, "what can be expected in future inspections". Sr. Housing Inspector 356-5133 _ Fe bru~ BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION KEY FOR ABBREVIATIONS CITY OF I0 WA CITY Type of Improvement: ADD Addition ALT Alteration DEM Demolition GRD Grading/excavation/filling REP Repair MOV Moving FND Foundation only OTH Other type of improvement Type of Use: NON Nonresidential RAC Residential-accessory building RDF Residential-duplex RMF Residential - three or more family RSF Residential-single family MIX Commercial & Residential OTH Other type of use Page: 1 Date: 03/03/95 From: 02/01/95 lB..: 02/28/95 CITY OF IO~A CITY EXTRACTION OF OU[LDING PERMIT DATA FOR CENSUS BUREAU REPORT Permit Applicant name Address Type Type Stories Units Valuation No. lmpr Use BL095-0030 JIM NONDEHERO 226 S CLINTON ST 12~'4" X 30* ADDITION TO THE REAR OF BUILDING. ADD NOR 0 0 $ 11800 8L09S-0041 OUR REOEENER 511 ~ELROSE AVE ABD NON 0 0 $ 2000 LUTHERAN CHURCH EXTERIOR EXIT BALCONY AND STAIRWAY, ADD NON permits: 2 $ 13800 8L095-0048 H I TOI4ASIH 610 BELDON AVE T',~O STORY AODITlON. AOD RSF 0 0 $ 75000 HL094-0780 DICK ARNENS 1412 BURESH AVE ADO RSF 0 0 $ 20000 14"X 22~ TUO STORY ADDITION TO $.F,D. ADD RSF permits: 2 S 95000 8L095-0057 NATIONAL COMPUTER 2510 N OOOGE ST CENTER REMOOEL OFFICE SPACE (~/ORK PACKAGE ALT NON 0 0 $ 37'5110 8L095-0063 PLANNED PARENTHOO0 2 S LINN ST OF O.I. INTERIOR NENCOEL OF CLINIC. ALT NON 0 0 $ 25000 BLD95-0051 IO~A STATE BANK 127 ~ASHINGTON ST REHOVE AND REPLACE ~ALLS TO NEET ADA RESTRO0~S. ALT NON 0 0 $ 18000 8L09S-0061 ANDERSON-BENDER 52 STURGIS CORNER DR NENOOEL OFFICE SPACE. ALT NON 0 0 $ 10000 BL095-0050 CITY CARTOH, INC. 3 E 8ENTON ST (REAR) ALT NON 0 0 $ 6000 OFFICE RENOOEL. BLD95-OO?OOUNCAN-HATNESON- 321NARKET ST GLASGO~ RENOOEL OFFICE SPACE. ALT NON 0 0 $ 6200 BL095-0035 THE NEIGH80RNOO0 2105 BROADWAY ST ALT CENTER INSTALL A KITCNEH IN A BASENENT STORAGE RO0~. INSTALL ~IIlO0~ OFF FRONT OFFICE NEAR THE ENTRANCE. 0 0 S 4000 BL095-0045 EVAN EVANS 424 HIGHLAND CT MOVE INTERIOR SEPARATIOH ~ALL. ALT NON 0 0 $ 2000 BL095-0067 GYRATER PROPERTIES 2415 HEINZ RO ALT NOR 0 0 $ 500 DIVIDE EXISTING RESTROOHS OF CO~IMERCIAL SPACES. ALT NON permits: 9 S 442810 Page: 2 Oate: 03/03/95 Fr~: 02/01/95 ~o.,: 02/28/95 CiTY OF IOWA CITY EXTRACT[ON OF BUILDING PERMIT DATA FOR CEHSUS BUREAU REPORT Permit Applicant name Address Type Type Stories Units Valuation NO. Impr Use BL09S-0036 JOH~ ROFFBAN 413 JEFFERSON ST ALT RNF 0 0 $ 3000 REBOOEL XITCNEN AND BATN. ALT RMF permits: 1 $ 3000 BLO9S-00S9 SANOLER, MARK AND JAYNE KITCHEN REHOOEL. TUCSON PL ALT RSF 0 0 $ 34000 BL095-0026 JOAN HART 115 N GILBERT ST COHVERT S.F,D. TO A ROO~41BG HOUSE. MAX.- 5 ROGflERS, ALT RSF 0 0 $ 30000 BLD95-0008 SCOTT, LILLG, LILLIG 412 FAIRCHILD ST , PART. INTERIOR RE~OOEL OF THE 1ST FLOOR ONLY. ALT RSF 0 0 $ 17500 BLO95-0038 C.B. DEVELOPMENT 2441 ASTER AVE FINISH LC~ER LEVEL ALT 2SF 2 0 $ 7000 BL09S-0017 GNASSAN SINADA BASEBENT RE~'U)DEL 18 PHOENIX PL ALT RSF 0 0 $ 3500 BLD95-00S8 JASON LEE 7~6 CHESTNUT CT ALT RSF 0 0 $ 3500 FINISH BASEMENT 8LD95-0066 CLIFFORD gALTER$ FINISH BASEMENT 1120 N GOVERNOR ST ALT RSF 0 0 $ 3000 BLD95-0069 GARY KLINEFELTER AND 1131 WASHINGTON ST ALT RSF CINDY PARSONS INSTALL ROOF DORHER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEAD ROOfl FOR EXISTING STAIRWAY. 0 0 S 3000 BLO95-0067 BRUCE BENTLEY 31 CAJqERON CT ALT RSF 0 0 $ 1000 FINISM BASEMENT ACT RSF permits: 9 $ 10Z500 BL095-0039 HEINZ ROAD HINI 2435 HEINZ RD NEW NON 0 0 S 100000 STORAGE TgO (2) MINI STORAGE BUILDIHGS, NEN NON permits: 1 $ 100000 BL095-0052 EO O~BRIEN 2435 HEINZ RD NEW OTN 0 0 $ 17000 8~ HIGH FENCE AROUNO TNE ENTIRE PROPERTY NEU OTN permits: 1 S 17000 BL09~'0662 TERRY IRA 523 CHURCH ST 24' X Z610ETACHEO GARAGE NEW RAC 0 0 S 7000 Page: 3 Oa:e: 03/03/95 From: 02/01/95 To..: 02/28/95 CITY OF [O~A CITY EXTRACTION OF 8UILDING PERMIT DATA FOR CENSUS BUREAU REPORT Permit Applicant name Address Type Type Stories Units Vatuation No. [mpr Use NE~ RAG permits: I $ 7000 8LO9A-O?50 HOOGE CONSTRUCTION 43 JEI4A CT NE~ RDF 1 2 $ 156204 OUPLEX COMO0 ~ITll Tt~O CAR GARAGE, MEg ROF permits: 1 2 S 156204 8L095-0025 TUCKER, RICHARO ARO 55 BUTTERHUT CT BUFFIE S.F.D, ~ITH THREE CAR GARAGE. NE~ RSF 2 1 $ 310000 llLO95-0044 NC CREEOY TAYLOR 33 8UCNANAH CT S.F.D, ~ITH T~O CAR GARAGE. NE~ RSF 2 1 $ 222138 8L095-0031 GLENN YEIHER 4766 [NVERHESS CT COHSTRUCTION, INC S.F,O. ~IT~ THREE CAR OARAOE. 191742 BLO98-0028 SAYLOR CONSTRUCTION 1922 ~0008ERRY CT S,F.O, ~iT~ T~O CAR OARAGE. NEY RSF 2 1 $ 161587 8L095-0032 BOYO CROSLLY 2]39 CAHERO~ RY CONSTRUCTION S,F.O. ~iTX T'~O CAR GARAGE, NE~ RSF 2 1 $ 144661 BL095-0053 DARRELL HANSEN AND 83 DURANGO PL JUDY. S.F.O. ~ITH THREE CAR GARAGE. NEN RSF 1 1 $ 139249 llLO95-006~ DON ROBINSON 1436 ABUROEEH CT S,F,D. N[T8 T~O CAR GARAGE. NE~ RST 1 1 $ 134009 BL095-0042 JASON LEE 2306 BIRCH Sr S,F.D, g[Tll T~O CAR GARAGE. NE~ RSF 1 1 $ 124666 8L094-0793 RiCH LOUGHRAR 2059 HANNAH JO CT S,F,O. UITN T~O CAR GARAGE - ZERO-LOT-LINE. NEW RSF 1 1 $ 90030 8L094-0794 RICH LOLIGHRAH 2071 HANNAH JO CT S,F.O. giTN T~O CAR GARAGE · ZERO-LOT-LINE. MEg RSF 1 1 $ 90030 8L09§-0065 CHUCK NOUSEL 3/~41 SOUTH JAMIE LN CONSTRUCTION S.F.O. ~lTll T~O CAR GARAGE - ZERO'LOT-LINE NEU RSF 2 1 S 89427 8L095-0066 CHUCK NOUSEL 36,33 SOUTI{ J~IE LN NET~ RSF 2 1 $ 89427 CONSTRUCTION S,F,O. NITLL TgO CAR GARAGE - ZERO'LOT'LINE NE~ RSF permits: 12 12 $ 178676~ PaRe: 4 Date: 03/03/95 From: 02/01/95 To..: 02/28/95 CITY OF 10~A CITY EXTRACTION OF BUILDING PERMIT DATA FOR CENSUS BUREAU REPORT Permit Appticant name Address Type Type Stories Units VaJuation No. Inpr Use TOTALS l~r $ 2726078 03/03/95 10:46 ~319 339 5728 NO~t~I"EST JR NORTHWEST JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 1507 8TH STREET CORALVILLE, IOWA 52241 Bryce Hansen, Principal (319)339-6827 Dean Gorrell, A~o¢late Principal March 1,1995 To: City of Iowa City Mayor and City Councilors You are cordially invited to attend the Iowa City Community School District's Annual Global Issues Conference. The Global Issues Conference sponsored by the Iowa City Community Schools, and I-lil!.q Bank and Trust will be held on Friday, March 10, beginning at 9:00 AM at the Westfield Inn, Coralville. The conference is an enrichment activity designed to expand the students' global awareness on population, food, and resource issues. This will be the culminating aeumty of a umt taught by the district s global smdie~ teachers. One hundred and nine of the school district's seventh graders from South East and Northwest ltmior High Schools will pmieipate in Ms evenL E~ch student selected to be a conference participant maintained a B or better grade for the first trimester and wrote an essay on global issues. The conference will begin with a keynote addre~ by Ms. lael Silliman, Intematinnal Studies Center, University of Iowa. A period for questions will follow the presentation. Various cau. cu.s.periods will follow in which students introduce themselv.es and begin to pnonuze resolutions that center on population, food, and re. source ~ssues that confront the world today. Position statements will be mad, and debating and a vote will take place before delegat~ adjourn at tht; end of the afternoon. The 1995 conference plmmers are Mr. Bancroft, Mr. Bockekaan, Ms. Carman, Ms Covington, Mr. Gemreels, Mr. MeGtory, Mr. Shullaw, and Mr. Remley. For additional information contact Steve Shullaw - 339-6827 Sincetel .~ VOL d, NO. 5 House debates crypro; Senate talks SDWA i i~ While Senate staffers continue drafting SDWA reauthorization language (relying primarily on the bill that passed the Senate last year), House lawmakers were busy debating EPA's forthcoming information col- lection rule and the health risks of Cryptosporidium. House Democrats failed at the com- mittee level to exempt the ICR from the GOP's regulatory moratorium measure but plan to take their fight to the floor. Rap. Carolyn Maloney, O-N.Y., author of the ICR-exemption amendment killed Feb. 13 by the House Government Reform & Oversight Committee, indicated she would offer a similar proposal when the full House votes on H.R.450 (more in page 3 feature). Committee Republicans said Maloney's amendment was unnecessary, m'guing that if crypto endangered public health nationwide as Democrats contend- ed, the White House Office of Manage- ment and Budget could exempt the rule from the moratorium based on the big's "imminent hazard" exclusion. However, Democrats argued that the ICR was needed to enable EPA to collect the very information that would determine if crypto posed an imminent hazard. EPA, meanwhile, is nearing a deci- sion on whether to strip crypro (and per- haps other microbial) monitoring from the ICR if it determines the monitoring method can't generate meaningful data (early rapoHs indicate highly variable c,'ypto and Giardia results from pedor- mance evaluation samples). A final rule is now expected in late summer. For their part, water suppliers contin- ue their efforts to design an alternative national microbial study to be done should ICR microbial monitoring not be conducted. Members of an AWWA technical action workgroup were to meet late last week to further discuss the plan, which would have a limited number of sampling sites. February 27, 1995 NRDC says GOP reg-reform bill could block crypto rule Efforts by EPA to regulate Cryptospo~dium in drinking water could be severely hampered if Congress passes regulatory reform measures being pushed by House Republicans, environmentalists contend. Leading the euviros' campaign against H.R.9--part of the GOP's Contract With America--is the Natural Resources Defense Council, which on Feb. 21 released a 121- page report . ~,~ ~~ on the poten- tial effects of the bill on 19 federal environmental statutes, including the SDWA. The NRDC action closely followed the organi- zation's recent launching of a nationwide Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water, backed by some 200 urganizations. Former Sens. Edmund Muskie, D-Maine, and Robert Stafford, R-Vt., along with former EPA Admin- istrator Russell E. Train, joined NRDC's crusade against provisions of H.R.9, one of which would require detailed risk and cost-bene- fit analyses of major rules. "Breach of Faith: How the Contract's Fine Print Undermines America's Envfrormrental Success" contains graphics detailing what one NRDC offidal called o "bureau. cratic maze" awaiting proposed rules under H.R.9. Muskie, who helped write the Clean Water Act, said the bill "would halt 25 years of accomplish. ment and turn the clock back to the days when the special interests made the rules and the people absorbed the risks." Train, who headed EPA during the Nixon and Ford administrations, said H.R.9 "would radically alter the environmental regulatory scheme put in place by a dozen prior Congresses and six presidents from both political parties over the course of a quarter-century." Crypto obstacles claimed The report, edited by NRDC's Gregory Wetstone, a former aide to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., claims the GOP bill "would erect major obstacles to EPA's plans to adopt negotiated standards for [Cryptosporidium} agreed to in 1994 by state and local governments, the water industry, and public health and enviromental groups." According to the report, the potential obstacles include reducing paperwork burdens, keeping regu. ~* Continued on page 8 Inside This Issue D.C. Opponents mount attack on GOP reg reform bills--page 3 LEAD. EPA targets N.C. systems for lead rule compliance--page 5 Evansville, Ind. About 145,000 Evans- ville-area residents and 35,000 residents of Hender- son, Ity., were forced to boil their water Feb. 11 after their drinking water was threatened by a mysterious chemical spill on the Ohio River. Health officials lifted the no~e two days later after the chemical Plume passed water utility intakes on t~e river, State environmental officials said tests of the plume, whose cause is ~ unknown, found high levels of ben- r,r r Ky, Frankfort water plant workers have found zebra mussels in the Kentucky River, according to the state Division of Water. The employees found the zebra mussels on the screen covering the water plant's intake pipe, the division Said. The Frankfort water plant will try to ~ol the zebra mussels by galvanizing the screen covering its intake and feed- log chlorine into its intake pipe. C,.~vanized surfaces contain zinc, which z~bra mussels avoid. bsaquah Is facing a potential water cmnca as it juggles the requirements of oxiderig residents with the needs of pro- posed developments. One of the largest ~opcsed developments now before city planners--3,250 homes--would need almost halt of the city's existing water supply. That might not leave enough water to serve other areas seeking a~xatlon to the city, or even for addi- tional residents within the existing city boundaries. City officials have identified eight potential annexation areas totaling 14,357 acres in the area about 12 miles southeast of Seattle. Some have their own water supplies, but many don't. Ofticials say they will have to consider all future demands before making a decision on the development now before tJlem. I~aUo, Ind. Amoco Oil Co. has stopped supplying 40 residents with bottled water after rocent tests showed that their well water was safe to drink, the company and state said. Amoco had been provid- ing the residents with bottled water since 1991, when the oil company revealed that gasoline from an under- ~nd storage tank at a gas station it ~ operated was leaking into ground* NRDC report (frown page 1) latory compliance costs under 5 per- cent of the estimated g~oss domes- tic product and preventing Con- gress from passing new unfunded mandates. A Republican [ask force on regu. latory reform, meanwlule, has urged hhe Senate Enviromuent Comnuttee to ease the "excesswe burdens" the SDWA imposes on state and local governments. In a letter sent to Committee Chair John Cha/ee, R-R.I.; RanPang Democrat Max Baucus, D-Mont.; and Drinking Water Subcommittee Chair Dirk Kempthorne, R-Idaho, the Regulatory Relief Task Force said the SDWA has become "a symbol of the growing frustration over pre- scriptive, often arbitrary, federal regulations" that don't include enough funds to implemant them. The Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water gained headlines across the country earlier tins month wtth press corderences in many states announcing the release of an NRDC-prepared report on recent waterborne disease out- breaks. SDWA recommendations In the report, NRDC recommend- ed the followtug SDWA changes: I~ mandatory water system san- itap/surveys listrag all knot,~ra and possible pollution sources; I~ monitoring of source water, including the use of citizen volun. teers; I~ utility partictpation in deci- sions about permits and controls of potential pollution sources; and I~ utility authority to recover treatment and monitoring costs or iniunctive relief from "polluters tlueatening or contaminating their source water." CWA Mandates Momtodum Takings Rap. 8ud Shuster, R-Pa., inlroduced H.R.961 as a startino point for House hearings. House and Senate conferees were meeting at press time to reconcile their respective bills on unfunded mandates. House Goverment Reform Committee passed H.R.450 covering rules from Nov. 20, t994, through the end of 1995 (more in page 3 feature). House Judiciary Comminee passed H.R.925 requiring compensation for losses exceeding 10 percent of properi'/value (more in page 3 feature). 6666 W. Oumcy Avenue DenvoL CO 80235 FIRST PaST CCASS CLASS us POSTAG£ PArD Denver CO Parma No. 1180 60755 02 IWA WW.4.5 ~R. EDWARD A, MORENO IOWA CITY WATER DIVo 2039 TANGLEWOOD DRIVE IOWA CITY IA 52240 01/01/90 Bipartisan bill to mfo?m CWA offered by Shuster Rep. Bud Shuster, R.Pa., recently infroduced a biparti- san bill (H.R.961) to reautbo- rize the Clean Water Act and slated over 30 CWA hearings this spring with an eye toward committee markup in Apdl. Cosponsored by seven other Re- publicans and eight Democrats, the bill-- intended as a starting point for discus- sions--is based on a proposal floated last year as a more landowner-friendly alter- native to a leading House CWA-reform measure that ultimately failed to pass. The new bill from Shuster, chair of the Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, includes wetlands provisions previously pushed by Rep, Jimmy Hayes, D~La., and would authorize $2 billion a year for the CWA revolving loan fund, The wetlands provisions would link protection efforts to wetlands functions and values and establish measures pro- tecting procedural and private property rights. The bilrs call for $2 billion/year for state loan funds represents a drop from last year's leading CWA bill, which would have authorized funding increasing annu- ally from $3.5 billion in 1996 to $5,5 bil- lion in 2000. ~so on t~e CI~/A front: I~ Sen, Lar~ Pressler, i~-S.D,, intro- duced a wetlands-reform bill (S,352) that would nstablish criteria for categorizing wetlands based on environmental signifi- cance, exempt certain farm-based wet- lands from permit requirements and require that landowners be compensated for losses related to wetlands regulations. 1~ Sons. Lauch Faircloth, H-N.C., and Bennett Johnston, D-La., are reportedly developing a comprehensive wetlands- reform biff, while Sen, John Chafee, R- R.I., is expected to continue to resist reforms he believes would weaken pro- tection of wetlands. Chafee, chair of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, has said he will handle CWA reauthorizafion at the committee level. I> Rep, Sherwood §oehlert, R-N,Y,, chair of the House Transportation Com- mJttee's water resources subcommittee recently said Congress witl have a hard time providing any more CWA loan funds than the $1,6 billion targeted in President Clintoh's FY96 budget, Speaking at a recent meeting of the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators, Boehlert said he doesn't favor the we6ands provisions in Shnster's new bill and will seek compromise lan- Opponents mount attacks on GOP reg-reform bills House Republicans continue to advance on the regulatory reform front but are now facing major coun- terattacks from [he Clinton a~s- tration and others who claim some proposals would gut envkonmental rules and threaten public health. EPA ckief Carol Bro%,mer lobbed the first shell early this month, blast- ing elements of the GOP Contract With America she said "would undermine virtually every public health and ~.)~./'~j' '~ envkonmen- tal protection that Ameri- cans have come to take for granted in this country." House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently responded by naming EPA "the biggest job-killing agency in the inner city in America today" and calling national envuonmental poli- cies over the past 20 years "absurdly expensive." Last week, Browner fired again, calling proposed risk assessment re- quiremeats "a perversioo of science and a pep~ersion of common sense." Opposition groups Browner's attack was joined by other adraimstration officials and a host of environmental, labor and public interest representatives who unanimously voiced their opposition to legislation that builds risk and cost-benefit assessments into the regulatory process. Of note to water suppliers: An EPA proposal to regulate Crypro. spondium in drinking water has received considerable play as a pri- mary example of legrelation that could be delayed for years if some of the current reform proposals become law (more in page I stories). Sen. John Chafee, R-RI., also weighed in against the dsk assess- ment provisions in H.R.9. Chafee, chair of the Environment & Public Works Committee, last week called them a "prescription for gridlock," a McGinty, chart of the White House Council for Environmental Quality, who called H.R.9 a "law-breaker's bfil of rights." In the face of growing oppom. tion, even Grogrich admitted that some changes could be made to the original language m H.R.9, adding "these b~lls are not locked in stone." 'Takings' bill Another major target of the new assault are bDs aimed at addressing regulatory "toldrigs" of private prop- erty. The House Judiciary Commit- tee on Feb. 16 passed a takings bill (H.R.925) that requires the federal government to compensate private property owners for any reduction in value of at least 10 percent. House floor action is expected this week on the bill, which is opposed by moderate GOP mem- bers and federal and state officials. Some GOP lawmakers wanted to lirmt the bill's scope to wetlands and endangered species actions and hike the compensation trigger to a 33 percent loss. Federal and state officials, including the National Conference of State Legislatures, womed the proposal would create a new "entitlement" program that would benefit wealthy corporations and landowners. Browner weighed in by stating the proposal would require "crip- pling federal payments under almost all of EPA's programs." and Vice President AI Gore warned that takings legislation could "create a budget-busting, bureaucratic maze." Moratorium measure Meanwhile, the House Govern- ment Reform & Oversight Commit- tee, on Feb, 13 passed H.R.450, which would create a regulatory moratorium retroactive to Nov. 20, 1994, and effective until the end of 1995. The measure, expected to be heard on the House floor this week, is opposed by the Clinton admmas. guage. position echoed by Kathleen tration. City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Mamh 7, 1995 City Council City Manager Mayor's Youth Employment We have received an informal inquiry from representatives of Mayor's Youth about the possibility of their separating from the current relationship with the City. They have a number of reasons and are interested in being able to act a little more independently. To the best of my knowledge the proposal is being put forth in that they believe to be their best interest and I know of no other hidden agenda. We would likely continue to provide certain suppod services. I wanted to let you know that this issue was being kicked around. We do have reseamh to per[orm and we will be talking with representatives of Mayor's Youth. b~ayo~h City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 7, 1995 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Federal Budget Cuts Some of what we have heard about upcoming House budget recisions (cuts). No summer youth employment Cut CDBG 8% (City -maybe $80,000) No low income energy assistance Lead-based paint (Leaves $10 million) Section 8 rental subsidies No safe drinking water loans No urban parks Bus subsidies ~t~871 million -8349 million -$1,300 million -$90 million -$2,700 million -~1,303 million -~7.5 million -955 million I'm sure we will hear more. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 7, 1995 City Council City Manager Pending Development Issues An application submitted by Boyd & Rummelhart, Inc. to rezone an approximate 1.63 acre lot located on the west side of Waterfront Drive, approximately 140 feet north of Stevens Drive. (45-day limitation period: April 10, 1995). An application submitted to Johnson County by Lyle Donohoe to rezone approximately 8.56 acres from RS, Suburban Residential, to CH, Highway Commercial, for property located within Fringe Area 7 on the south side of Highway 1 at its intersection with Landon Road. An application submitted by Irene Pelsang for preliminary plat approval of Pelsang Place, a four lot, single-family residential subdivision located in the RS-5 zone at 114 S. First Avenue. (45-day limitation period: April 10, 1995). A concept plan submitted by Jim Miller for a mobile home park development located south of Hwy 6 and Bon Aire Mobile Home Park. A site plan submitted by Richard Pattschull for a 16 unit apartment building located along Ralston Creek in the RNC-20 zone at 621 Iowa Avenue. A 28-E Agreement between the City of Hills and the City of Iowa City regarding the extraterritorial review of subdivision plats. A reduction in the size of the existing CN-1 zone at Scott Boulevard and Court Street, and creating a new CN-1 American Legion Road. zone at the southeast corner of Scott Boulevard and Similar letters sent to Senator Harkin and Representatives Leach, ~ussle, Lightfoot and Grandy. March 18, 1994 The Honorable Charles Grassley U.S. Senate 13§ Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 CITY OF I0 WA CITY RE: S.1822 Dear Senator Grassley: I appreciate the time you spent with the delegation of ejected officials from Iowa on Tuesday, March 15. As I said then, I want to stress to you the importance of defending local cable 'IV and telecommunications provider franchising authority. S.1822, which deals with this matter, will be brought before the Senate shortly. Iowa City has a long tradition of regulating cable 'IV, enforcing quality standards, ensuring consumer protection and services, and providing access channels and programming for the local government, public library, schools, and the public in general. All expenses for these services have been funded from franchise fees and other revenues from the cable company. These revenues are being threatened by the proposed legislation. It is our strong belief that it is the locality that can best identify the community needs and wants regarding cable TV and telecommunications in general and that local government, therofore, is in the best position to contract with and regulate such providers. AddiUonaliy, without the accompanying franchise fees, many if not all of the local services provided to regulate, protect citizens and consumers, and provide local access programming are endangered. This, in the City's view, would be disastrous, Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. Please feel free to call Mr. Drew Shaffer, Iowa City's Cable TV Administrator, at 319-356-5046, or Assistant City Manager Dale Helling at 319-356-5013, if you have any questions, If you are inclined to support legislation removing franchising authority, please give us the opportunity to explain in greater detail the City's position. But, in the meantime, I hope you can be persuaded to vote for inclusion of local franchising authority in any new legislation. Thanks again for getting together with us. Sincerely, /Susan M. Horowitz Mayor CC: City Council Broadband Telecommunications Commission Drew Shaffer Dale Helling TOM HARKIN IOWA lnit ,$tatt ,$ tt WASHINGTON, DC 20510-1502 May 13, 1994 (202} 224-3284 ~ (202} 224-4533 AGRICUL1URE APPROPRIATIONS SMALl. SUSINESS LABOR AND tiUMAN RESOURCES The Honorable Susan Horowitz Mayor City of Iowa City 1129 Kirkwood Avenue Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor Horowitz: Thank you for contacting me. you. I am always glad to hear from I appreciate the benefit of your thoughts on Senator Ernest Hollings' bill, S. 1822. S. 1822 or the Communications Act of 1994 is intended by its sponsors to foster the further development of the nation's telecommunications infrastructure and protection of the public interest. The Communications Act of 1994 has been reported to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, where it currently is undergoing hearings. On a related note, there are several bills before the House of Representatives also pertaining to this issue. I have attended a number of meetings on this legislation in order to hear both its proponents and opponents, but have not yet formulated a position. Again, I thank you for sharing your views on this bill. Rest assured I will keep your views in mind as the Communications Act of 1994 is debated in Congress. Sincerely, Tom Harkin United States Senator TH/ktm 2 ! 0 WAdJUT ST. 733 FEDERAL BLDG. DES MOINES, IA 60309 (~tB) 284~B74 350 WEST STH ST. 3t$ FEDERAL BLDG. DUBUOUE. IA 52001 (31B} 582-2130 5TH AND BROADWAY, BOX H 317 FEDERAL BLDG. COUNCtL BLUFFS. [A 51502 (712) 325-O038 gl2) 252-1B§0 [319] 363-6832 tate enatt CHARLES E. GRASSLEY WASHINGTON, DC 20510-1501 May 27, 1994 Susan M. Horowitz, The Hon. City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mayor Horowitz: Thank you for your recent correspondence. I am glad to have the benefit of your views. I welcome your comments regarding S. 1822, the Communications Act of 1994. This bill has been the subject of a number of hearings by the Senate Commerce Committee. Once the committee completes its hearings, committee members will then decide whether to approve this legislation as is or in some modified form. If reported to the full Senate for consideration, the committee will also issue a report with its findings and explanation of its recommendations. Your corments will be particularly helpful to me as I study the committee's reports and recommendations to develop my position on this legislation. Please keep in touch. I always appreciate hearing the views and opinions of the people back home. Sincerely, Charl~es~.es.'Grassley United States Senator CEG/dl FINANCE AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY Committee Assignments: JUDICIARY OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT BUDGET SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING June 1,1994 CITY OF IOWA CITY The Honorable Tom Harkin U.S. Senator 531 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Harkin: Thank you for your reply to my letter regarding S.1822, the Communication Act of 1994. I certainly appreciate your objectivity on this issue and your effort to examine both sides before taking a position. As you formulate your position, please keep in mind the devastating effect this could have on citizens locally if we were to lose our franchising authority and corresponding franchise fees. Citizen subscribers continue to look to local government to represent their interests and to procure reasonably pdced, competitive cable television packages. Further, they rely on revenues from the cable operatom to fund local access programming by local government interests, education and the community at large. I reiterate this point based on my strong feelings that frenchising authority and franchise fees are absolutely necessary to allow local citizens their only real, affordable means of maintaining a public access channel within the community, Your support for the preservation of this opportunity in Iowa City and in communities throughout the nation is urgently needed. Again, thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Susan M. Horowitz Mayor CC: bc2-8 City Council Broadband Telecommunications Commission City Manager ECEIVED JUL 5 1§94 June 24, 1994 Mayor Susan Horowitz 410 E. Washington Iowa City, IA 52240 {202) 224-3254 TrY (202} 224-4533 AGRICULTURE APPROPRIATIONS SMALL BUSINESS LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES Dear Mayor Horowitz: Thank you for contacting me. I am always glad to hear from you. I appreciate your continuing interest in S. 1822, the Communications Act o~ 1994 and its potential impact on consumers. You raised several important points in your letter. Please be assured that I will continue to study this important issue and will keep your views in mind as it is debated in the Senate. Again, thanks for sharing your views with me. Please don't hesitate to let me know how you feel on any issue that concerns you. Sincerely, Tom Harkin United States Senator TH/ktm 210 WALNUT ST. 733 FEDERAL BLDG. OES MOINES, IA 50309 (515) 284-4674 80X 74884 131 C 4TH ST. 3i4B FEOEITN. BLDG. DAVENPORT, IA 52801 (310{ 322-1338 320 6TH ST. ('/12) 252-1650 June 27, 1994 The Honorable Jim Leach House of Representatives 2186 Rayburn Building Washington, DC 20515 CITY OF I0 WA CITY Dear Jim: You have received previous correspondence from Mayor Horowitz regarding H.R. 3636, the "National Information Communications and Information Infrastructure Act of 1994." The most recent information we have is that this bill will come before the full House of Representatives on June 27 for a vote. Further we are told that the final version of this legislation and the report explaining its provisions have not yet been released for review by the public that, under a procedure which bypasses the House Rules Committee, this bill will be brought to the floor for a vote. According to our information from the U.S. Conference of Mayors, this bill contains provisions which may reduce fees now paid by cable and telecommunications providers operating under local franchise agreements, will reduce future franchise fees, and will possibly pre-empt all local authorities from requiring franchises from any new telecommunications provider. Needless to say, from the local perspective, this would be devastating. It is with this revenue that local government represents its citizen subscribers by monitoring and enforcing terms and conditions of franchise agreements, provides the only means by which the public can access the television medium in the community, and informs citizens in a much more direct and comprehensive way regarding local government and other activities which profoundly influence their community lives. On behalf of the City Council, I strongly urge that you oppose H.R. 3636 unless these provisions can be amended so that the appropriate local authority is restored. As always, I appreciate you consideration of the City's position on this issue. Sincerely, Stephe "J. Atki~ City Manager cc: City Council tps-1 July 27, 1994 CITY OF I0 WA CITY The Honorable Charles GrassIcy U.S. Senate 135 Hart Senate Office Buitding Washington, DC 20510 Re: S.2195 and S.1822 Dear Senator GrassIcy: The above telecommunications-related legislation is now being debated in committee. It is without a doubt one of the most important telecommunications bills of this century and will ultimately shape the Information Superhighway and how cities will, or will not, play a role in its development. The single-most important issue faced by cities in this legislation is the city government's ability to franchise, and thus regulate, cable companies as well as telephone companies who are beginning to compete with cable companies by entering the video and information delivery marketplace. As this legislation comes before you, please bear in mind that without local franchistng authority, city governments will: Lose all control over such company's use of public rights-of-way which has traditionally been under the city's jurisdiction; Lose all benefits that have begun to accrue to cities in their short but productive cable regulatory history (such as local programming of all kinds ranging from council meetings to public access forums) as well as franchise fees; Lose their most effective bargaining chip in dealing with cable companies and phone companies on a day-to-day basis, thus losing their ability to ensure that the community's needs and interests are adequately addressed; Effectively remove regulation from the locality to the state or, more likely, the federal level, thus rendering cities powerless in helping to mold and shape their own destinies with regard to the Information Superhighway as well as other local needs and interests. 410 EAST ~/A$111~IOTOH STREET* IOWA CITY, IOWA -2- Thank you for your consideration and assistance in this matter, If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please call Mr. Drew Shaffer, Iowa City's Cable Administrator, at 319-356-5046. Sincerely yours, Susan M. Horowitz Mayor CC: City Council Broadband Telecommunications Commission Drew Shaffer, Cable TV Administrator D{a Mma~a, ~ 5030~2140 CHARLES E. G~SSLEY w*~*~, ~ 50701~497 ~ 2oa r.oE~t 8u~ao WASHINGTON, DC 2051~1501 Septe~er 15, 1994 ~ 307 F~ The Hon ~ayor-C~ of Iowa City 410 East ~tn~ton Iowa City, owa 52240-1826 Dear Mayor Horowitz: Thank you for your recent correspondence. I am glad to have the benefit of your views. I welcome your thoughts on the proposed information superhighway and your concerns of how it may affect the local governments' franchising authority. The National Public TelecomgLunications Infrastructure Act, S. 2195, would affirm that any sort of information network would allow public use. The bill is now before the Senate Commerce Committee. If reported to the full Senate for consideration, the committee will also issue a report with its findings and an explanation of its recommendations. Additionally, I welcome your comments regarding S. 1822, the Communications Act of 1994. The Senate Commerce Committee has approved this legislation and referred it to the full Senate for further consideration. Your comments will be particularly helpful to me as I study the committee's reports and recommendations to develop my position on these bills. Please keep in touch. I always appreciate hearing the views and opinions of the people back home. Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley United States Senator CEG/dl FINANCE AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY Committee A,.,tsig nrnents: JUDICIARY OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT BUDGET SPECIAL COMMrFrEE bN AGING City Council Work Session Economic Development Policy March 20, 1995 - 6:30 P,M, Council Chambers Discussion Items Sustainable economic development Economic development policies and strategies 1995 proposed economic development activities Industrial park development Industrial park/financial assistance criteria General discussion City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 14, 1995 City Manager David Schoon, Economic Development Coordinato~ Sustainable Economic Development During recent City Council discussions regarding the city's economic development policy, Councilor Throgmorton has raised the concept of sustainable development. The definition of sustainable development, in particular as it relates to economic development, appears to have become clearer in recent discussions. However, how to apply it locally appears to be less clear. At the February 13, 1995, work session, the Council directed the staff to develop a concept paper addressing this issue. The purpose of this memo is to provide a better understanding of the concept of sustainable development, and in particular as it relates to sustainable economic development. Having defined sustainable economic development, the memo addresses how the concept can be applied at the local level, and specifically how the Iowa City community can pursue a sustainable economy. Sustainable (Economic) Development Sustainable development is based on the fundamental principals of ecology which focus on the relationship and interdependence of organisms in an environment. The relationship and interdependence of those organisms is determined by the carrying capacity of an ecological system. Carrying capacity is the maximum quantity of a species that can be steadily and consistently supported by the resources of the ecological system in which that species lives. As the human species our ecological system is the earth, and based on the concept of "carrying capacity" the earth can sustain only a certain number of people. The concept of carrying capacity can be applied at the community, state or national level. The concept is the same within each subarea; each ecological system can only sustain a certain number of people. Given this basic understanding of ecology, one definition of sustainable development is that it is the "rate of development that can be sustained over time given the carrying capacity of land." (City of Olympia Sustainable City Philosophy, "OSCP" - Brundtland Report/Our Common Future). "Sustainability implies that the use of energy and materials in an urban area are in balance with what the region can supply continuously through natural processls such as photosynthesis, biological composition, and the biochemical processes that support life." (OSCP - Sim Van der Ryn and Peter Calthorpe, Sustainable Communities: A New Design Synthesis for Cities, Towns and Suburbs) Proponents of sustainable development argue that the human race is exceeding the earth's carrying capacity. That is we are far exceeding the uppermost limit on the number of humans our ecosystem, the earth, can sustain over time, Fundamentally, our overuse of nonrenew- able resources and the proliferation of industrial processes that produce hazardous materials, which have no useful role in our ecological system, have led to the earth's decreased carrying capacity. In essence humans are decreasing the carrying capacity of the earth at the same time we are increasing in population. All of this begs the question: What is the rate at which and manner in which the world can sustain the present and future human population? Proponents of sustainable development are unsure of the answer. However, they are sure that the world's carrying capacity is decreasing and that we should behave in a manner that is more respectful of the ecological system in which we live. Proponents of sustainable economic development would argue that the present manner in which we conduct commerce does not capture the true production costs of the products we produce. In general, both in principle and practice, business is rewarded for producing the best product demanded by the market for the lowest price. Proponents would argue that in today's market, the "lowest price often meaps highest unrecognized costs". The costs that are unrecognized are those that society as a whole must bear such as higher health care costs as a result of pollution or long term storage costs for the disposal of hazardous materials - both of which are a result of many present-day industrial processes. Paul Hawken, author of Ecology. of Commerce, argues that the "external costs of industrial production must be integrated into prices if the public is to change its habits and consumption patterns". Only then will industry and commerce recalibrate their inputs and outputs to adapt to the carrying capacity of the environment. It is important to note that proponents of sustainable development often make a distinction between development and growth. "Growth refers to economic expansion in physical dimension, while development refers to qualitative change in a physically non-growing economic system in a state of dynamic equilibrium maintained by its environment" (OSCP - Herman E. Day, World Bank economist). In essence economic growth and development must take place, and be maintained over time, within the limits of the environment. The environment and the economy are not antagonistic in a sustainable economy, but are complementary. A sustainable economic development system requires certain actions to ensure that the environment and economy are complementary processes. David McClosky at Seattle University has outlined guidelines to use to determine if actions are sustainable. Four of McCIosky's basic guidelines state that an action is considered sustainable if it balances resources used and resources regenerated; if it leaves resources as clean (or cleaner) at the end of use as at the beginning; if it leaves the viability, integrity, and diversity of natural systems restored and maintained; and if it leads to enhanced local and regional self-reliance. (OSCP- "Criteria of Sustainability" David McCIosky, Seattle University) Advocates of sustainable development suggest a different way of thinking regarding all facets of life: the environment, economics, social issues, and political issues. Sustainable development is a cyclical and holistic view which advocates can apply to all levels of human existence - global, national, and local. 2 Local Sustainable Economic Development Given a general understanding of the basic concept of sustainable economic development, th~ remainder of the memo focuses on sustainable economic development at the local level. The following section is based on three works that provide insight on local sustainable economic development. The works include the City of Olympia, Washington's Sustainable City Philosophy and draft Program; Michael Kinsley's concepts outlined in his Economic Renewal Program; and Paul Hawken's principles of sustainability and sustainable businesses. The fundamental principles of local sustainable economic development are energy efficiency, reusable waste, and systems of feedback and accountability. Enerqv Efficiency. At the local level there should be a move towar0 reliadce on renewable energy sources (solar and hydrogen power sources) and less reliance on nonrenewable energy sources. The continued use of nonrenewable energy sources is depleting the earths capital resources, while the use of renewable energy would not deplete our capital resources. As the move towards greater reliance on renewable energy sources is made, nonrenewable energy resources should be used more efficiently. Energy efficiency programs not only reduce a community's dependency on nonrenewable resources, but can create local jobs and save a community millions of dollars that otherwise would be exported out of the community, As Kinsley's states energy efficiency programs are all about "plugging the leaks". Reusable waste. At the local level a community should work to reduce waste and increase the useful life of goods by conserving, reusing, and recycling materials. Hawken calls this his "waste equals food" principle. In essence waste from an industrial process should be waste that can be used as an input in another industrial process. An industrial ecology should be established that tailors all manufacturing by-products so that they become the raw materials of subsequent processes and that uses only materials that are reusable. This industrial ecology should be established, because the production of hazardous waste has no place in a sustainable society. By adhering to a "waste equals food" principle, our goal should be to create objects of durability and long-term utility whose ultimate use or disposal will not be harmful to present and future generations. Systems of feedback and accountability. Sustainable development requires systems of feedback and accountability. Feedback and accountability are greatest when consumers are close to the producers of the goods and services they consume. By purchasing goods locally, the consumer is more aware of the process by which the goods or services were crea~ed. In this setting, the transition to full cost pricing (prices reflect environmental and human costs of production) is more likely to occur. Supporting existing business, encouraging new local enterprises, and recruiting compatible businesses are keys to local sustainable economic development. Establishment of buy local programs creates more wealth by having dollars respent more often locally. Identifying goods that are not being produced locally, but that could be produced locally, provides another opportunity to keep dollars locally. Anotl~er strength includes a good or service that could be produced locally and sold elsewhere. Creating local systems of feedback and accountability requires replacing nationally and internationally produced items with products created locally and regionally. Establishing these systems also brings economic benefit to the area. 3 The underlying focus of sustainable economic development is to focus from within rather than focusing exclusively on outside sources for economic development - such as recruiting large businesses to the community. The economic well-being of a community is dependent on a community's ability to efficiently use energy, to reduce its level of pollution and waste by creating only reusable waste, and to create systems of feedback and accountability. Sustainable Economic Development in the Iowa City Community How can we apply these sustainable economic development concepts and practices in the Iowa City Community? Councilor Throgmorton has provided three tenets of what he believes to be fundamental components of a sustainable economy: Support businesses that would help local businesses and residents use nonrenewable natural resources more efficiently. Support businesses that would produce goods and services that are needed by local businesses or used as imports by local businesses. Support businesses that would treat waste as an input to some other business, These three principles are very similar to those expressed throughout the preceding parts of this memo. The following are only a few examples of possible activities, which would begin to implement some of the ideas expressed throughout this memo, Buy Local proqrams. Within the last year or so Hills Bank has begun a promotional effort to encourage retail consumers to shop locally. Those endeavors could be continued, A similar program could be established in the industrial and commercial sectors of the economy by establishing linkages between local suppliers and local buyers. Energy-Efficiency Proqrams. Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric performs energy audits and installs energy saving devices for its customers. Programs such as these should be encouraged and could be expanded to include broad scale weatherization projects. Programs could be established through the City's Energy Coordinator to determine the best forms of renewable energy sources, such as solar, small-scale hydroelectric power, wind generation, and biomass, for the Iowa City community, The City could work with the Homebuilder's Association to explore means of constructing homes that are more energy efficient. Encoura~le New Local Enterprises. The Community could examine all of the goods and services it purchases from outside of the community and evaluate whether any of them could be produced locally. The Chamber of Commerce is in the process of establishing a business visitation program. This program should be endorsed and the City should play a supportive role in this process. This visitation program could explore means of providing a network to connect suppliers with producers and to explore sources of wastes from one business that could be used as an input by a.nother business. 4 Education. A fundamental component of establishing a sustainable economic development program is to educate the members of the community so that th,ey understand the concepts behind sustainable development. Summary The concepts of local sustainable economic development focus on the interaction of the local environment and local commerce. They require that you think of the environment as you are engaging in economic activities, since the health of the economy is dependent upon the ecological system it serves. Sustainable development truly requires a new w~y of thinking. Today, society and commerce act in a linear fashion separated from the environment. Proponents of sustainable development claim that our interaction with the environment has been to use its resources and to dump our waste in it, some of which does not work itself back into the ecology of the area, Sustainable development requires that "ecolog~ and commerce should be unified in one sustainable act of production and distribution that mimics and enhances natural process." (Hawken, Ecology of Commerce p. 3) Hawken states that the "... economy as we know it is not an inevitable form, growth does not necessarily mean more waste, prosperity does not have to be described by kilowatts used, autos produced, hamburgers flipped and consumed. Value is what we ascribe. Prosperity is what we make it to be. So what will that be?"... "We have to be able to imagine a life where having less is truly more satisfying, more interesting, and of course, more secure," because the health of our ecosystem is dependent upon us living within its carrying capacity (Hawken, pp. 59 and 209). Having reviewed the concept of sustainable economic development, the Council may wish to consider adopting an economic development policy that integrates the philosophy .of sustainable development. if the Council adopts elements of the philosophy, strategies to implement the philosophy would need to be developed. As you read through the proposed economic development policy, you will notice that parts of the policy include elements of sustainable economic development. Date: To: From: Re: City of iowa City MEMORANDUM December 1, 1994 City Council City Manager Economic Development Policies and Strategies The Council appears to have concluded that it wishes to continue to use the existing policy statements of the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, 1989 Update, as the guiding principles of its economic development policy. You also seemed to express interest in specifics regarding the means of implementing the policy statements. We have taken the Comprehensive Plan economic development policy statements (with a few minor adjustments) and have added strategy and action statements that could be used to implement the policy statements. These strategy and action statements come from the comprehensive plan, ideas expressed by council members, and statements and ideas from the task forces. I would like to point out that the strategy and action statements do not necessarily require the City's direct involvement, but may require actions by another entity in the community. For example, the action statement, "Develop a mechanism that would assist underemployed individuals find more appropriate job opportunities within the community" (Policy 2, Strategy A, Action 3), does not necessarily mean that the City should perform this service, but that City believes that the community's economic health requires this service be provided within the community. Once approved by the City Council, this proposed document would then be used by the City Council, the City Manager's Office, and the Department of Planning and Community Development to guide the City's daily economic development activities. Future discussions can focus on specific economic development action steps. Listed are activities for 1995. This list includes identifying targeted industry groups, identifying local labor force issues, taking steps to ensure that adequate amounts of industrial and commercial land be provided for future business activities, establishing financial assistance criteria, and establishing a formal mechanism to coordinate development activities between the University and the City. As other specific economic development issues arise, those would also be addressed. cc: Karin Franklin David Schoon Marty Kelly, ICAD Steve West, ICAD DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICIES, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS POLICY 1: DIVERSIFY AND INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX BASE BY (1) ENCOURAGING THE RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING INDUSTRY AND (2) ATTRACTING INDUSTRIES THAT HAVE GROWTH POTENTIAL AND ARE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES. (Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, 1989 Update, page 31) Strategy A: Identify industry groups that are compatible with the community and toward whicl~ the community should target its economic development efforts. Action 1: Identify specific local businesses that fail within these targeted industry groups and adopt community policies that encourage capital investment and growth in these industries. Action 2: Identify businesses within these targeted industry groups that are not already in the community but that would complement local businesses and establish a marketing plan to recruit them, Action 3: Further develop a data base of economic and demographic information and perform various economic analyses to assist businesses, Strategy B: To the fullest extent practical promote awareness of the city's economic development policies through public forums. Action 1: Maintain a clear and consistent economic development policy, Action 2: Through community education efforts, increase public awareness of the role of business in the community and the importance of a strong economy. Action 3: Coordinate a community effort to promote the attractiveness and positive aspects of doing business in Iowa City. POLICY 2: INCREASE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES CONSISTENT WITH THE AVAILABLE LABOR FORCE (Comprehensive Plan, page 31) Strategy A: Identify local labor force skills and the types of jobs compatible with the local labor force. Action 1: Work with the local Work Force Center (Job Service) to identify the local education and training background of the local. labor force. Action 2: Work with local employers to determine their labor needs and the means by which these can be met. Action 3: Develop a mechanism that would assist underemployed individuals find more appropriate job oppodunities within the community. Action 4: Continue to gather information about employment abilities and needs of the sectors of the local labor force with special needs (persons with disabilities, welfare recipients, and other low-income individuals) and provide the necessary suppodive programs and services that assist individuals within these sectors, Strategy B: Identify the work force skills required by the targeted industries and identify the education and training needs of the local work force to meet the required job skills. Action 1: Interview businesses within the target industry groups to determine their work force education and training requirements, Action 2: Work with Kirkwood Community College and the University of Iowa to provide the appropriate education and training necessary for work force skills of the targeted industries. Action 3: The local community school systems (K-12) should work closely with business to determine the skills and knowledge needed to perform in today's work place, Action 4: Work with the local educational institutions to develop curricula at all educational levels that encourages creative and innovative thinking to prepare workers for the ever-changing work place. POLICY 3: PROVIDE AND PROTECT AREAS .SUITABLE FOR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT (Comprehensive Plan, page 32) , Strategy A: Provide for the extension of infrastructure which will encourage development in areas designated for industrial and commercial growth. (Comprehensive Plan, page 32) Action 1: Direct the extension of infrastructure so as to maintain and contain industrial development on the edge of the community in industrial parks, but not in a ring around the city. Action 2: Construct and maintain a system of roads and bridges, telecommunications and fiber optics, sewer, water, and solid waste disposal facilities that provides the necessary infrastructure for commemial and industrial development. Action 3: Through public, private, or public/private initiatives, ensure the availability of an adequate amount of industrial and office reseamh park land and extend the necessary infrastructure. Strategy B: Encourage commemial activity to take place in existing core areas or neighbor- hood commercial centers and discourage the proliferation of new major commer- cial areas. (Comprehensive Plan, page 32) Action 1: Use zoning as a tool to prevent the proliferation of commercial develop- ment outside of designated commercial cores. Action 2: When necessary, use incentives to encourage development and redevelop- ment within designated commercial core areas. Action 3: Perform market analyses to determine the supply and demand of commercial land and commemial office/retail space. Action 4: As the city grows, zone additional areas for neighborhood commercial development. Strategy C: Continue and enhance downtown revitalization (Comprehensive Plan, page 32) Action 1: Play a supportive role to private sector initiatives to maintain and strength- en downtown commercial activities. Action 2: Continue to assist community efforts to expand cultural activities and opportunities in downtown Action 3: Survey downtown businesses and customers to work toward a downtown that is accessible to persons with disabilities and persons using alternative modes of transportation. Action 4: implement the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. 4 Action 5: Action 6: Strategy D: Action 1: Action 2: Continue to monitor the spatial arrangement and design of downtown development to minimize conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and to add to the attraclive appearance of downtown. Continue to provide the necessary public infrastructure, including parking and public spaces, in order to maintain the economic health of the downtown. Provide opportunities for the Iowa City work force to live close to their place of employment. Through the use of land use regulations, provide the opportunity for a variety of housing types to locate near commercial and industrial areas. When necessary, provide financial and other incentives for the provision of low and/or moderate income housing in close proximity to employment opportunities, 5 POLICY 4: CONTINUE TO COOPERATE WITH EXISTING LOCALAND REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITHIN IOWA CITY (Comprehensive Plan, page 33) Strategy A: Continue to use the Iowa City Area Development Group as the lead economic development agency for the economic development activity of the area. Action 1: Individual marketing plans for targeted industry groups should be devel- oped for the area. Action 2: Focus economic development marketing efforts on promoting the attractiveness of Iowa City to facilitate expansion of existing businesses, maintaining the mix of high-tech and production line jobs, and encourage new businesses within the targeted industry groups to locate in Iowa City. Action 3: Continue to support ICAD's efforts to coordinate a regional eastern Iowa economic development effort. Strategy B: Continue to coordinate economic development efforts with the University of Iowa. Action 1: Work with the University of Iowa to enhance and establish avenues for technology transfer and to develop mutually beneficial programs for encouraging economic development (Comprehensive Plan, page 33) Action 2: Through a joint working group, coordinate the growth and development policies of the City and the University. Strategy C: Develop new and enhance existing means of communication between and amongst entrepreneurs, businesses, government, and educational institutions. Action 1: Continue to work with the business community through the activities of the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce. Action 2: Continue to encourage tourist and visitors to the area through the activities of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, Action 3: Encourage the sharing of knowledge among industries through industry networks and consodia, and between industries and the University of Iowa and Kirkwood Community College. Action 4: Encourage the creation of a business development clearinghouse and etwork that would ass st nd v duals pursu ng entrepreneurial opportunities, 6 POLICY 5: IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC H. EALTH OF THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THE EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES Strategy A: Establish programs that encourage businesses and individuals to more efficiently use resources. Action 1: Encourage energy and resource efficiency programs. Action 2: Encourage waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs. Action 3: Encourage the creation and/or expansion of markets for recycled materials. Action 4: Where possible, locate commercial and industrial activities in such a way that energy resources are conserved by minimizing travel distance for consumers, employees, and the transportation of raw materials and finished products. (Comprehensive Plan, page 4) Strategy B; Provide an attractive environment to businesses involved in environmental technology and services. Action 1: Support businesses producing and marketing environmentally-sound products. Action 2: Support businesses developing renewable energy resources. 7 POLICY 6: CONSIDER FINANCIAL INCENTIVES AND PROGRAMS TO FACILITATE ACHIEVING THE ABOVE OBJECTIVES (Comprehensive Plan, page 33) Strategy A: Focus incentives on infrastructure development, worker training and retraining, and an efficient and equitable development review process. Action 1: Invest in infrastructure that will encourage business investments that create high paying jobs. Action 2: Assist local businesses to draw upon state programs, community college programs, and other technical and financial assistance programs that facilitate industry modernization and worker training and retraining. Action 3: Regularly review, with assistance from the business community, the local development review process and. make changes to the process that encourage business activity within the community. Strstegy B: Develop cdteria and an analysis mechanism to use whenever considering the use of financial incentives for economic development projects. Action 1: Using the Community Economic Betterment Account (CEBA) program criteria as a base, develop criteria to be used when the City considers granting or participating in the granting of any financial incentives for economic development. Action 2: Before action is taken on any economic development matters being considered by the City Council, its Commissions, Boards, or Committees, the potential impact upon the social service needs of the people in this community will be considered. Action 3: Identify the needs of low and moderate income households and target the use of Community Development Block Grant funds toward economic development projects that would assist them. Strategy C: Local financial markets should meet the needs of local commercial and industrial ventures. Action 1: With the assistance of the local financial institutions, identify shortfalls in the local financial market that inhibit investment in commercial and industrial enterprises. Action 2: Identify the financial needs of minority and women-owned businesses and establish a program to assist with those needs. CALENDAR YEAR 1995 PROPOSED ECONOIVIIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Identify industry groups that are compatible with the community and toward which the community should target its economic development efforts. Work with the Local Work Force Center to identify the local education and training background of the local labor force. Work with selected local employers to determine their labor needs and means by which these can be met, Through public, private, or public/private initiatives, ensure the availability of an adequate amount of industrial and office research park land and extend the necessary infrastructure. Perform market analyses to determine the supply and demand of commercial land and commercial office/retail space. Implement the components of the Near Southside Plan. Establish a joint working group to coordinate the growth and development policies of the City and the University, Establish criteria to be used when the City considers granting or participating in granting any financial incentives for economic development. Inform local and regional'economic development agencies of the City's economic development policies, strategies, and related development interests, ecodev~activity.95 PROPOISED IND[JSTRJAL PARK EAST PROPERTY approx. 80 acres t / / / / / / FOLLOV~!N(~ I$ .4~ ~ BE81' DOCUMENT AVAILABLE bIINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE JOI-INSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE IOWA CITY COUNCIL: JANUARY 24, 1995 Subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors at a subsequent formal meeting. Chairperson Duffy called the joint meeting to order at 4:34 p.m. Supervisors present were: Joseph Bolkcom, Sally Stutsman, Charles Duffy, Stephen Lacina, and Don Sehr. City Council members present were: Mayor Susan Horowitz, Naomi Noviek, Jim Thingmorton, Larry Baker, and Karen Kubby. Council Member Ernie Lehman joined the meeting at 5:03 p.m. Absent wa~ Council Member Bruno Pigott. PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK Lacina presented a map of the site, located southeast of Iowa City and bounded by Ford Lane, Scott Boulevard, and the railroad. The County received a request to rezone 2.6 acres near the site. A.F. and Mary Io Streb own 80 acres in the area. At present, there are only two residences in the area. A great deal of infrastructure is available nearby, and the site would be appropriate for a long-term industrial development. Bolkcom asked where the existing sewer line is located compared to the site. Arkins ~d the lift station would not serve the area, but the site can be sewered. The infrastructure can be developed if the City and County choose to pursue the proposal. Lacina said if a joint public/private venture is started now, the governments would not have to buy the land. Eventually, the site would be appropriate for City annexation. The project would create jobs in the County, and the key is planning it correctly now. Bolkcom asked in which order the process should go, and if annexation should be the first step. Kubby said current City policy is that services will not be provided to an area unless it is a part of the City. Lacina said the Board of Supervisors sent the first zoning application back to the County Planning and Zoning Commission, so the entire 80 acres could be considered as an industrial area. He said the stream and trees are a natural barrier, and the strip along Scott Boulevard may have some commemial viability. Kubby said. the Council has discussed holding private firms, who work in partnership with the public sector, to a higher standard for such items as the type and quality of jobs, and the amount and type of water use. Lacina said if the City does not buy the land, public money would go to infrastructure development rather than interest payments on unsold land. Kubby said Iowa City Area Development (ICAD) has said people axe looking for larger industrial areas. Lacina said if someone wanted a lot the size of Proctor and Gamble's, they would be turned away as a lot that size does not exist. :O .loint Meeting Minutes (subject to approval): January 24, 1995/page 2 Novick said a publie/private partnership is worth considering, if the Strebs are w. illing to work with it. Lacina said he believes the Strebs would be amenable, if they are allowed to farm the. unused parcel in the interim. Sehr said he does not believe the Strebs would be interested in the types of restrictions Kubby had discussed. Horowitz asked if the Strebs own the land outright. Lacina said the Strebs are taking possession of the land on March 1, as a residential-zoned tract. The Business Development Inc. Board still exists, and it would be a natural body to take over this project. Items such as sewage pre-treatment could be built into the project. Bolkcom said he would like some controls over smoke-stack type industries, as the site will eventually be surrounded by neighborhood housing. Horowitz said the City and County should discuss setting up criteria for the project. Lacina said the County should talk with City staff before the County Planning and Zoning Commission makes a decision. Throgrfiorton said the City needs to be specific about the kinds of business that will be sought. Horowitz said the site could be a mix of industrial areas and an office park. Lacina said proposed construction of affordable housing is being watched carefully, and if the project is rejected, landowners would be wary of working with local government. He said one beauty of this project is the cleanness of the site, and a large input of public money will not be needed. Novick said only 6% of the City's assessed valuation is in machinery and equipment, and only 50 to 55 % of this is taxed. Kubby said not many partnerships such as this have been done in the area. Details need to be discussed on the front end of the public process, and not at the end. Horowitz said too many details could scare off investors, and the goal should be to allow investors to be creative. Kubby said details do not equal regulation. Lehman arrived at the meeting at 5:03 p.m. Bolkcom said the Strebs will be back with a zoning application soon and will need an answer. The City Council needs to decide if and when to provide public improvements, and when these will be included in capital improvement projects. Kubby asked what the County's role wofild be, especially if the City annexes the site. Novick said some cooperation could be arranged on sewer and roads. Lacina said if the zoning application fails due to objections, the site would still be zoned residential. The Strebs will want an answer on zoning this spring. Novick asked if the Strebs could ask to be zoned industrial, without annexation. Horowitz said involuntary annexation was possible but unlikely. Kubby said involuntary annexation would be against the Comprehensive Plan. Joint Meeting Minutes (subject to approval): January 24, 1995/page 3 FRINGE AREA AGREEMENT The City Council and Board of Supervisors agreed to defer discussion of the Fringe Area Agreement, as neither body had obtained copies far enough in advance for adequate review. LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX Horowitz said many people have talked to the City about the issue. Novick said it would not make sense to pass the tax unless it was county-wide. Kubby said she has no idea if a majority of the Council is interested. Novick said the Council needs to make it known that a local-option tax is being considered. Duffy asked if some or all of the revenue would be earmarked for property tax relief. Novick said that would be up to the entity; the County could use revenue for tax relief and the City could use it for other purposes. Baker and Sehr said they believed part of the revenue had to be used for tax relief. City Manager Steve Atldns said revenue does not have to be used for tax relief. The ballot issue must declare what the revenue will be used for by each community. This may differ from community to community. The vote will be held in all contiguous cities as if they were one city. (This would include Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, University Heights, and Hills.) If approved, the tax will be binding on all cities in the multi-city unit, but cities that do not pass the tax will not share in the revenue. In practice, this has meant that cities which reject the local option tax often go back and pass it the second time. Novick said that under State law, local option sales tax revenues are divided on a formula based 75% on population and 25% on properly valuation. Sehr said the law had changed significantly since Johnson County voted down a tax several years ago. Novick said rural areas can share in revenues even if they do not have a single business. Throgmorton asked how an issue would be placed on the ballot. Arkins said a petition could be presented to the Board of Supervisors. In addition, the Council of a city with over 50% of the County population could vote to place the issue on the ballot. Iowa City meets this population standard. Some communities place a sunset on the tax. Novick said Black Hawk County had passed a tax for road repair five years ago, with a five year sunset. Novak said Black Hawk County still needs to fix its roads, and is voting on renewal of the tax today. Kubby asked how much money would be raised. Atkins .said $4.5 million a year. Throgmorton said a critical issue to him is the relationship between the sales tax and the relative regressivity of water rates. Horowitz said she would be interested in the perception of whether the sales tax could help people in terms of water rates. Joint Meeting Minutes (subject to approval): January 24, 1995/page 4 Bolkcom said the sales tax is a very regressive burden, especially when coupled with water rates. Horowitz said one would cancel out the other. Novick said the idea is to use revenue from the sales tax as a way to lower water rates. Water rates will still rise, but the increase will be less. Bolkcom said in either case, people of lower income will pay a greater percentage of their income, as people of high and low incomes use about the same amount of water. Sehr said many people spend little on taxable items and would benefit. Baker asked how much revenue will come in from higher water rates. Atldns said if both pending water projects are done, the annual debt service would be about $9 million. The sales tax would offset about half of that amount. Kubby said it would be interesting to see if people of lower incomes paid a larger percentage of income in sales tax. Novick said Iowa's sales tax does not include items like food and medication. Bolkcom said the'City has a huge capital expenditure coming up, but he would like to see the County get along on what it has. Sehr said he would like to see any County sales hax revenue earmarked 100% for property tax relief. He added that many counties have approved a sales tax since Johnson County tried to pass one. Kubby said them have been complaints about a five-cent raise in parking ramp rates hurting business, yet them have not been comments about the impact of a proposed sales tax on business. Lacina said he did not think a sales tax would hurt business, and a tax had not hurt sales a( outlet malls in Williamsburg.' The tax could bring new revenues into the County. Bolkcom said most of the people who would pay a sales tax live hem. Horowitz said a sales tax would not focus only on downtown. Kubby asked .if the tax could only be applied to certain items. Atldns said taxable items would be the same as what the State collects sales tax on. Novick said the only exception was in communities that have passeel a hotel and motel tax, in that case the sales tax would not apply to rooms. Sehr asked if University of Iowa athletic tickets would be taxed. Atkins said he believes University tickets are exempt. Throgmorton asked what portion of tax revenue would be from visitors and tourists. The City Council and Board of Supervisors agreed to hold their next joint meeting, to be hosted by. the City, on Tuesday, April 4, 1995. Adjourned at 5:33 p.m. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Februa~ 9,1995 CityCouncil City M~nager Industdal Park Criteria and CEBA Criteda During the recent discussions regarding the development of a new industrial park (or what is seen as the extension of the existing park), members of the City Council have expressed the need to establish cdteda for the prospective businesses locating in the industrial park. In discussing the criteria for the industrial parl~, council members have used the phrases "industrial park criteria" and "CEBA criteria" intemhangeably. To assist your discussion, I would suggest that you make a distinction between these two phrases by way of the use of the phrases "industrial park criteria" and 'public financial assistance criteria". Industrial Park Criteria Our most recent discussion has focused not so much on a city-owned and operated industrial park, but an industrial park that is a joint public/private venture. A venture that could include the city, county, private landowners, and other members of the community, which would come together as padners. The purpose of the padnership, to ensure that the Iowa City community has sufficient industrial park land available for business expansions and new businesses. Up to this point the discussion has been to annex and zone land for the type of uses allowed in the General Industrial, I-1, Zone. A question the City Council must address is whether or not a goal of the Council is to ensure that the community has an adequate amount of land zoned general industrial. Recent discussions have centered around whether or not the I-1 Zone will meet future industrial needs in the community. I believe determining the zoning for the future industrial park as a major part of the "industrial park criteria". (Attached is a copy of the I-1 Zone requirements for your reference.) If the Council decides that the community needs additional I-1 Zone type land, what role does the 2 City want to play in making that happen? Does the Council want to be partners with the County and private entities to make this happen? If making industrial park land available is the partnership goal, is recouping the industrial land and infrastructure costs in the interest of all padies involved, as well as profit? In essence, all of the parties involved would be acting as developers by providi.ng a product - industrial park land, and they hope to recover development costs (or for some make a profit). With the basic issue of ensuring that an adequate amount of industrial park land exists in the community, is not the basic "industrial park criteria" the type of land uses that would be permitted in the industrial park? The zoning requirements and any additional land use covenants may then be the fundamental components of the "industrial park criteria". (For your reference, attached is an excerpt from the Protective Covenants and Restrictions for BD Industrial Park). Public Rnanclal Assistance Criteria Providing additional industrial park land may not initiate the economic growth that the community would hope to enjoy. There may be instances when the city decides to invest public funds in specific individual industrial developments located in this new industrial park. This may be in the form of wdting down the cost of the land, applying for CEBA funds, providing direct grants or loans, or providing utility rate breaks. Whatever the form of public investment in a specific development project, the Council has stated there needs to be a set of criteria. Up to this point, the Council has focused on additional cdteria for CEBA applications: however, these same criteria could be applied to other forms of public financial assistance in other economic development projects. As a point of reference, I have enclosed the list of additional CEBA questions that Mayor Horowitz and Councilor Kubby compiled and an example of the selection criteria the State uses for certain CEBA application. These have been the types of criteda councilors have been referring to when they talk about "CEBA criteria" or "public financial assistance criteria". Examples to Help Differentiate Between "Industrial Park Criteria" and "Public Financial Assistance Criteria" Two examples may best represent how to distinguish between "industrial park criteria" and "public flnancla ass stance crlten . 3 Assume Jen & Sherry's ice cream manufacturing or a comb manufacturer comes to town and would like to locate in the industrial park. Neither is interested in receiving public financial assistance; however, they need a twenty acre site on which to locate. Without available industrial park land, neither is al;le to locate in Iowa City. However, by having available industrial park land and assuming they meet the criteda of the zoning ordinance and any additional land use covenants, both of these companies are able to locate in Iowa City. Now assume these same two companies come to town, but this time not only do they need an industrial site, but they also request public financial assistance. In this instance, each project would need to meet the "industrial park criteria" and the "public financial assistance cdteda" in order to locate in the industrial park and to receive public funds for each project. Summary The intent of this memo was to give the council a framework from which to work regarding the discussion surrounding °industrial park criteria" and "CEBA criteria". The Council needs to determine whether the criteria for the industrial park can be differentiated from the criteria for public financial assistance. In making that distinction, we can work toward concluding a project/policy plan to provide for future industrial activity in our community. bc4-1DS 14-6H-1 14-6H-1 CHAPTER 6 ZONING ARTICLE H, INDUSTRIAL ZONES SECTION: 14-6H-1: General Industrial Zone (I-1) 14-6H-2: Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2) 14-6H-1: GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE (I-1): Intent: The General Industrial Zone (I-1) is intended to provide for the development of most types of industri- al firms. Regulations are designed to protect adjacent nonresidential zones and other industrial uses in the zone. B. Permitted Uses: 1. Building contractor facilities, yards and pre-assembly yards. 2. Communications stations, centers and studios. 3. Manufacture, compounding, assem- bling or treatment of articles or mer- chandise from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to bone, canvas, cellophane, cement, cloth, cork, feathers, felt, fiber, fur, glass, hair, horn, leather, metal, pa- per, plastics, precious or semi-pre- cious metals or stones, rubber, shell, textiles, tobacco, wax, wire, wood (except logging camps, sawmills and planing mills) and yarns. 4. Manufacture of chemicals and allied products, except fertilizer manufactur- ing. 5. Manufacture, processing and pack- aging of food and kindred products, except stockyards and slaughterhous- es and grain milling and processing not regulated as a provisional use under subsection C2 of this Section. 6. Railroad switching, storage and freight yards and maintenance facili- ties. 7. Research, testing and experimental laboratories. 8. Wholesale trade and warehouse establishments for goods, including but not limited to automotive equip- ment, drugs, chemicals and allied products, dry goods and apparel, groceries and related products, elec- trical goods, hardware, plumbing, heating equipment and supplies, ma- chinery, equipment and supplies, tobacco and alcoholic beverages, paper and paper products, furniture and home furnishings. C. Provisional Uses: 1. Communication towers, provided a tower's distance from an R zone shall be ai least equal to the height of the tower. O Iowa City ~4-6H.t 14-6H- 1 2. Manufacture, processing and pack- aging of consumer food products which require grain milling and pro- cessing and which are classified un- der the following industrial classifica- tions: Flour and Other Grain Mill Prod- ucts (2041), Cereal Breakfast Food (2043) and Pr. epared Flour Mixes and Doughs (2045)'(Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Superintendent of Documents, U.S, Government Print- ing Office). These uses are permitted, provided: a. All manufacturing, processing, storing and packaging is conducted within completely enclosed buildings. b. All transferring of raw materials and finished products is conducted within completely enclosed buildings, by pneumatic tubes or by sealed con- tainers. c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the. grain milling and processing operation, submits to the Building Official, documentation dem- onstrating that the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) or its suc- cessor has approved the application and permit to install or alter equipment or control equipment if the IDNR or its successor requires such a permit. 3. Residence of the proprietor, care- taker or watchperson when located on the premises of the commercial or industrial use. D. Special Exceptions: 1. Cementitious concrete batch/mix plants. 2. Heliports and hellstops, subject to the requirements of Article L of this Chapter. 3. Schools, specialized private instruc- tion. E. Dimensional Requirements: 1. Minimum Lot Area: None. 2. Minimum Lot Width: None. 3. Minimum Lot Frontage: None. 4. Minimum Yards: a. Front: 20 feet. b. Side: None. c. Rear: None. 5.Maximum Building Bulk: a. Height: 45 feet. b. Lot Coverage: None. c. Floor Area Ratio: None. F. General Provisions: All principal and accessory uses permitted in this zone are subject to the requirements of Articles L through U of this Chapter. Said Articles are indicated as follows: I. Accessory Uses and Requirements: See Articles M through P of this Chap- ter. a. Permitted Accessory Uses and Buildings: See Section 14-6M-1 of this Chapter. Iowa City 14.~JH-1 14-8H-2 b. Accessory Use and Building Regulations: See Section 14-6M-2 of this Chapter. c. Off-Street Parking Requirements: See Section 14-6N-1 of this Chapter. d. Off-Street ;. Loading Require- ments: See Section 14-6N-2 of this Chapter. e. Sign Regulations: See Article O of this Chapter. f, Fence Regulations: See Article P of this Chapter. 2, Dimensional Requirements: See Artlcle Q of this Chapter. 3. Tree Regulations: See Article R of this Chapter, 4. Performance Standards: See Article S of this Chapter. 5, Nonconforming Uses, Structures and Land: See Article T of this Chap- ter. Special Provisions: None. (1978 Code {}36.27; 1994 Code) Iot~a City e EXCERPT FROM BDI PROTECTIVE COVENANTS & RESTRICTIONS All operations on the above described premises shall be conducted or maintained wholly inside enclosed buildings, except for loading and unloading of vehicles and transferring of material from storage areas to the enclosed buildings for operations and processing. No building shall be built on any portion of the above described property unless the following described requirements are met, to wit: a) The depth of the front yard shall not be less than fifty (50) feet. b) All subdivisions shall have lots of at least three (3) acres in size unless pdor approval for deviation has been granted by the Board of Directors of Business Development, incorporated. All areas except for the area covered by buildings and other structures, and except for driveways, sidewalks, and other walkways, and for loading areas, storage areas and areas used for the growing of farm crops, shall be used exclusively for the planting and growing of trees, shrubs, lawn and other ground covering which shall be maintained as required to keep said areas in a neat and orderly appearing manner. If construction of the buildings and structures on any single parcel purchased from Business Development, Incorporated has not started within two (2) years of date of purchase of any portion of any of ~he above described premises, Business Development, Incorporated may exercise the right to repurchase the site by refunding the purchase price and this provision is specifically agreed to and accepted by each purchaser. Business Development, Incorporated retains a first option to purchase any portion of the above described premises together with any structures, facilities or buildings located thereon and each owner hereby agrees to give written notice of said intention to sell to Business Development, incorporated, after which Business Development, Incorporated shall have a period of twenty (20) days in which to either accept or reject this offer. If the offer is rejected, the owner then has a right to sell to any third party provided that he may not sell any land offered to Business Development, Incorporated on terms less onerous than offered to Business Development, Incorporated. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and all persons claiming under them for ten (10) years at which time said covenants shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years unless by vote of the owners of more than fifty percent (50%) of the above described property it is agreed to change the said covenants in whole or in part. If the parties hereto or any of them or their heirs or assigns shall violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants or restrictions herein, it shall be lawful for any other person, or persons owning any other area in said above described property to prosecute any proceeding at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenants or restrictions and either prevent him or them from so doing or recover damages or other dues for such violations. The above only reflects an excerpt from the Protective Covenants and Restrictions for a portion of BDI. DRAFT Topics of Interest to City Council Members Regarding Proposed CEBA Projects When investing public funds in economic development projects, the Council judges the appropriateness of public investment in the particular business. The intent of the following questions is to provide the Council information to make a judgement and to also provide the company with an opportunity to become familiar with the expectations the community holds regarding business and industry in the community. When a company shows interest in applying for CEBA funds, city staff will provide the company with this list of questions, The company is free to answer all of the questions by any means it wishes or to answer none of them, If any questions are not answered pdor to the Council meeting at which the CEBA application is considered, a Council member might ask those specific questions at that Council meeting, Each individual Council member will evaluate the provided information and based on their own judgement determine whether to support application for CEBA funds, (Note: Some of these questions will also be addressed in the CEBA application,) Employee Issues What are the wages and benefits the company offers and how do they relate to state or national industry averages? What is the rate of turnover for different job classifications within the company? What is the company's policy regarding advancement of its employees? Does the company allow for flextime? Does the company provide day care? Does the company provide training and education to support national policies regarding equal employment opportunities? What types of employment opportunities does the company provide for people with physical and mental disabilities? Has the company been found to have violated any OSHA standards? If so, what corrective action has been taken? Has the company been found to have violated any labor laws? if so, what corrective action has been taken? What training programs are offered by your company for minorities, women, and people with disabilities? 2 Environmental Issues What policies or practices does the company adhere to in order to eliminate or minimize adverse employee health conditions? What types of pollution prevention programs does the company have established? What type of waste management plan does the company have? What types ~f alternative modes of transportation does the company encourage its employees to use? Has the company been found to have violated any environmental laws? If so, what corrective action has been taken? Civil Proceedinas Has the applicant or any principal ever been a party to a civil proceeding in which it was held liable for any of the following or is now a party to the. proceeding? Yes _No, Unfair or anticompetitive business practices Anti-trust violations (state and federal) including instances in which consent decrees were entered into Violations of securities laws (state and federal) False/misleading advertising Violations of FCC regulations Discrimination in hiring or promotion practices If "yes," please provide specifics. Communih/Issues What is the corporate policy regarding employees' involvement in the community? What is the corporate policy regarding the company's financial involvement and corporate pal'~icipation in the community? CEBA SELECTION CRITERIA The following provides a summary of the selection criteria used by the Iowa Department of Economic Development for projects requesting Community Economic Betterment Financing. IDED provides assistance under four separate program components 1) small business gap financing, 2) new business opportunities, 3) new product development, and 4) comprehensive management assistance.~ Though the following criteria apply to the new business opportunities and new product development program components, they are representative of the criteria used for all CEBA program components, New Business Opportunities and New Product Development Programs Local Effort Compared with Local Resources - Maximum 20 points This includes local participation from: local governments chamber of commerce local development corporation utility companies other (including community college job training programs), This local participation can be in the form of; grants & loans utility rate differentials tax abatement and tif financing infrastructure extensions other Private Contribution as Compared to CEBA Request - Maximum 20 points The greater the contribution by the assisted business, the higher the score. Certified Community Builder Community - Maximum 10 points A community must have a certified community builder plan to receive these points, Small Business, as defined by the SBA - Maximum 10 points Project Impact - Maximum 120 points Cost/Benefit Anelvsis - Maximum 40 points This factor compares the amount requested to the number of jobs to be created or retained and the project increase in state and local tax revenues, Also considered here is the for.m of assistance (e.g., a forgivable loan will receive a lower score than a loan) Quality of Jobs to be Created - Maximum 40 points, Higher points to be awarded for: Higher wage rates; Lower turnover rates; Full-time, career-type positions; Relative safety of the new jobs; Health insurance benefits; Fringe benefits; 2 Other related factors. {Please refer to section, Recent Changes to CEBA Rules) Economic Impact - Maximum 40 points. Higher points to be awarded for base economic activities, e.g.: Greater percentage of sales out of state, or import substitution; Higher proportion of in-state suppliers; Greater diversification of state economy; Fewer in-state competitors; Poten{ial for future growth of industry; Consistency with the state strategic plan for economic development; A project which is not a retail operation. The final Project Impact score is determined by taking the ~um of the Cost/Benefit, Quality of Jobs to be Created, and Economic Impact subsections and multiplying it by a reliability and feasibility factor (as a percent). (This factor is used in an attempt to factor in the department's judgment as to the likelihood of the project turning out as planned,) Potential for Future Expansion of the Industry in General - Maximum of 20 points This factor awards additional points for those projects that tend to show a greater potential for expansion of that industry in Iowa. Total Score - Maximum 200 Projects that score less than 120 points will not be recommended for funding by the staf. f to the committee. Any applicant that has substantially low wage scales or has a record of violations of the law over a period of time that tends to show a consistent pattern shall not be eligible under the program. Small Business Gap Financing. This component provides assistance for projects where the company currently is considered a small business by the SBA definition. (Generally less than 500 employees). New 8US/heSS Opportunities. This component provides assistance for start.ups and to companies of any size which are recruited from out of state. The companies must show that the project is in an industry that currently is under-represented in the state's economic mix and provides quality economic opportunities. New Product Development. This compgnent provides assistance for existing companies of any size, which can demonstrate that the project is for a new product line that currently is under-represented in the state's economic mix and provides quality economic opportunities, Comprehensive Management Assistance. This component provides special assistance to businesses that have received CEBA assistance or are under review for possible financial assistance. Assistance will be performed by consultants or professionals in such areas as market research, financial and inventory controls. management skills, recruitment and hiring, and other business-related areas. 3 Recent Changes to CEBA Rules For most CEBA projects: Business must now pay at least 85% of average county wage or ~9/hr, whichever is I~ss; rather than the old standard of 75% of average county wage; Over half of the project jobs must be at or above the 85% wage level; For purposes of calculating appropriate award size (i,e, S/job) only those positions above tile 85% level will be considered. For most projects to qualify for over 9§00,000, they must meet the following special criteria: Not a relocation within the state; Business pays at least 80% of standard medical and dental insurance; Business pays a Median Wage of at least 130% of County Average. For start-up projects: Not held to 85% wage standard, only need to meet old 75% standard; Limited to $100,000 award size. For all projects: Any business receiving CEBA dollars shall make available 10% of the new jobs created to Promise Jobs Program participants. Average county wage is calculated by using the most. current four quarters of wage and employment information as provided in Employment and Wages Covered by Unemployment Insurance report, Agricultural/mining and governmental employment categories are deleted in compiling wage information. ppdadmin~cebacrit ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES These criteria should apply to any economic development subsidy in which the City of Iowa City is involved. This includes tax abatement, infrastructure development, land (purchase or a sale at less than market value), CEBA applications, and IRB (do we still do these?). There may be other forms of subsidization that I can't think of--they should be added to this list. RIGHT-TO-KNOW The application should include: 1. type of incentive/subsidy 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. creation 10. environmental, compliance history value of above term of benefit current job level projected job level number of jobs shifted from elsewhere or lost length of job retention general statement of benefits statement of past incentive/subsidy and actual results of job worker safety, consumer, and labor issue There should be performance monitoring to make sure the entity is providing what is promised. If they do not, there should be a legal binding contract with them, a "clawback" guarantee agreement. This would ensure recourse by the city for getting public monies back, with interest, if the contract has been broken. As with human services funding, and now possibly small scale economic development funding for local festivals, there should be a thorough budget presented and a public process. I'm not sure the best form this would take, but would include, at a minimum, a public hearing process. WAGES AND BENEFITS I'd like to see prevailing wages for Johnson County be the target for jobs created with the help of public monies. These jobs should also have full health care coverage paid for by the employer. The working ~oor are the greatest burden on public assistance for health care and this would greatly improve the lives of many families as well as take the burden off of State for providing these services. In Austin, Texas, the amount of tax abatement can go up by 10% if the benefits package for employees includes child care. They also require that entities target employment to people with disabilities, people living at or below 80% of median income and to released convicts. Affirmative action policies are also required of the companies that receive city subsidies. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Jim Throgmorton's principles of sustainable economies are wonderful. These included having new businesses be suppliers of products for local businesses, helping use non-renewable resources better, and using the waste of one industry as an input for another. I would also add to those three principles that a company should be using current technology and compounds. They should not be using technology or compounds (i.e. CFCs) that are slated for elimination by state, federal, or international law. Uthers ideas: 1. energy~ficient construction/equipment/product Z. post-consumer content 3. pollution prevention programs 4. toxic reduction programs 5. good neighbor agreements-these are agreements with the community to have an open door policy of inviting the community, especially the immediate neighborhood of residents and surrounding businesses, to become informed of the plans for the new or expanding business. Once the shop is opened up, there is an open house, so everyone understands what is happening inside the walls of the business. If there are any problems with noise, air emissions, parking, etc., the community and business have already established a relationship upon which to base communication about these issues. 6. recycling program I like all the questions asked in the draft topics of interest. Some of these topics have been repeated above. City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 21, 1995 To: From: Re: City Council David Schoon, Economic Development Coordinato~5~---- Comments on Proposed Financial Assistance Questions and CEBA Criteria This memo .is a reminder that Council members should have their comments to me by the end of February regarding the documents "Topics of Interest to City Council Members Regarding Proposed CEBA Projects" and "CEBA Selection Criteria". Copies of both of these documents were included in your February 10, 1995, information packet. If you have any questions, please call me at 356-5236. f I \admin2\ceba\ec019 JOHNSON COUNTY ' HEALTHY~:PEO'PLE 2000 14-6H-1 14-6H-1 CHAPTER 6 ZONING ARTICLE H, INDUSTRIAL ZONES SECTION: 4. M~nufacture of chemicals and allied products, except fertilizer manufactur- 14-6H-1: General Industrial Zone (I-1) .~j ing. 14-6H-2: Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2) , ~. :'~ ,....~ 5. Manufacture, processing and pack- ~ ,..'~aging of food and kindred products, ~ ~.~ ,[v.~....~t stockyards and slaug~terhous- 14-6H-1: GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE~ (I-1): F'. ~"'~" not ~'~ge~l~/t~'d~'~'~ provisional ~e _~ ~k.~.~ ' ~nder subsection C2 of this Section. A, Intent: The General Industrial Zone'~ (I-1) is intended to provide for the '~ 6. Railroad switching, storage and development of most types of industri- J freight yards and maintenance facili- al firms. Regulations are designed to [ ties. protect adjacent nonresidential zones and other industrial uses in the zone. / 7. Research, testing and experimental / laboratories. B. Permitted Uses: ~ ~ · d~_~ ~ 8. Wholesale trade and warehouse 1. Building contractor facilities,".~rds establishments for goods, including and pre-assembly yards. but not limited to automotive equip- 2. Communications stations, centers and studios. 3, a_M~Qg_factum~ compounding, assem- bling or treatment of articles or mer- chandise from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to bone, canvas, cellophane, cement, cloth, cork, feathers, fe_~lt fib__.er, fur_.~. glass, hair, horn, leather, metal, pa- per, plastics, precmus or semi-pre- cious metals or stones, rubber, shell, textiles, tobacco, wax, wire, wood (except logging camps, sawmills and planing mills) and yarns. merit, drugs, chemicals and allied products, dry goods and apparel, groceries and related products, elec- trical goods, hardware, plumbing, heating equipment and supplies, ma- chinery, equipment and supplies, tobacco and alcoholic beverages, paper and paper products, furniture and home fumishings. C. Provisional Uses: 1. Communication towers, provided a tower's distance from an R zone shall be a{ least equal to the height of the tower. /owa City t4-6H-1 14-6H-1 2. Manufacture, processing and pack- aging of consumer food products which require grain milling and pro- cessing and which are classified un- der the following industrial classifica- tions: Flour and Other Grain Mill Prod- ucts (2041), Cereal Breakfast Food (2043) and Prepared Flour Mixes and Doughs (2045) (Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Superintendent of Documents, U,S. Government Print- ing Office), These uses are pertained, provided: a. All manufacturing, proceesing, storing and packaging is conducted within completely enclosed buildings. b. All transferring of raw materials and finished products is conducted within completely enclosed buildings, by pneumatic tubes or by sealed con- tainers, c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the grain milling and processing operation, submits to the Building Official, documentation dem- onstrating that the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) or its suc- cessor has approved the application and permit to install or alter equipment or control equipment if the IDNR or its successor requires such a permit. 3. Residence of the proprietor, care- taker or watchperson when located on the premises of the commercial or industrial use. D. Special Exceptions: 1. Cementitious concrete batch/mix plants, 2. Heliports and hellstops, subject to the requirements of Article L of this Chapter. 3. Schools, specialized private instruc- tion Dimensional Requirements: 1. Minimum Lot Area: None. 2. Minimum Lot Width: None. :3. Minimum Lot Frontage: None. 4. Minimum Yards: a. Front: 20 feet. b. Side: None. c. Rear: None, 5. Maximum Building Bulk: a, Height: 45 feet, b. Lot Coverage: None. c. Floor Area Ratio: None. F.~ G e n e r---"~rovts-ion, s:~ A-tl-'prmc~ pal and accessory uses permitted in this zone are subject to the requirements of Articles L through U of this Chapter. Said Adicles are indicated as follows: 1. Accessory Uses and Requirements: See Articles M through P of this Chap- ter. a. Permitted Accesso~/ Uses and Buildings: See Section 14-6M-1 of this Chapter. Iowa City DRAF'~. Topics of Interest to City Council Members Regarding Proposed CEBA Projects When investing public funds in economic development projects, the Council judges the appropriateness of public investment in the..,o~rti~r business. The intent of the following questions is to provide the Council informat'~'~.~(5-~ake a judgement and to also provide the company with an opportunity to become familiar with the expectations the community holds regarding business and industry in the community. When a company shows interest in applying for CEBA funds, city staff will provide the company with this list of questions. The company is free to answer all of the questions by any means it wishes or to answer none of them. If any questions are not answered prior to the Council meeting at which the CEBA application is considered, a Council member might ask those specific questions at that Council meeting, Each individual Council member will evaluate the provided information and based on their own judgement determine whether to support application for CEBA funds. (Note: Some of these questions will also be addressed in the CEBA application.) Employee Issues ~C.~ j~.~,C ¢~....,d.~"7 '~~¢"¢~"/~s¢~-'--( -~/ What are the wages and benefits the company offers and how do they relate to state or national industw averages? What is the rate of turnover for different job classifications within the company? What is the company's policy regarding advancement of its employees? Does the company allow for flextime? Does the company provide day care? ~ 4r Does the company provide training and education to support national policies regarding equal employment opportunities? ..4..~-~ (P'~hat ~,n_~t oppod~unit_Lem_does--the-cor[~pany provide for peo-ple-with~ L_physical and.~.~nt~~ ~,.~..~D,~. ~ Has the 'company been found to have violated any OSHA standards? If so, what corrective action has been taken? Has the company been found to have violated any labor laws? If so, what corrective action has been taken? What training programs are offered by your company for.,,...i.n~ women, and people with disabilities? ~ ,~ ,~ % '~/~ ' Environmental Issues cob ,~.,~ What policies or practices does the company adhere to in order to eliminate or minimize. adverse employee health conditions? ;".~-~ What types of pollution prevention programs does the company have established? What type of waste management plan does the company have? ,.~ What types of alternative modes of transportation does the company encourage its employees to use? (~,~.~ '~Has the company been found to have violated any environmental laws? if so, what ,!,~.L,,d~" corrective action has been taken? Civil Proceed nes Has the applicant or any principal ever been a party to a civil proceeding in which it was held liable for any of the following or is now a party to the proceeding? Ye..._~s No Unfair or anticompetitive business practices Anti-trust violations (state and federal) including decrees were entered into Violations of securities laws (state and federal) False/misleading advertising Violations of FCC regulations Discrimination in hiring or promotion practices If "yes," please provide specifics. Communitv Issues <~-,-'~'.~'(.,~What is the corporate policy regarding employees' involvement in the community? ~" What is the corporate policy regarding the company's financial involvement and corporate ~'"'/'~/~'~C-participation in the community? ' City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: March 17, 1995 TO: Memorandum for Record FROM: City Manager RE: Material Sent to Council Only Memorandum from the City Manager regarding organizational change - equipment maintenance. Copy of letter from the City Manager to Mary Mascher regarding landfill use. ~"~.~i .... L)~ AL_)~k..~ .~,~j .....~ ._ Memoranda from the City Clerk: a. Council Absences b. Council Work Session of March 6, 1995 Memoranda from the Department of Planning and Community Development: a. Iowa City: Beyond 2000 b. Relocation of "Showers" Residents Memorandum from the City Attorney regarding new assistant city attorney. Letter from Carol Ann Marlow regarding Council salaries. Minutes of the March 1, 1995, meeting of the Neighborhood Open Space Actio¢?~ Plan Committee. Minutes of the PATV Board of Directors, January 19, 1995. ~(~ Article: Annexation Primer for Planners /(~0~ Agendas for the March 9 and March 14, 1995, meetings of the Johnson County/~/, Board of Supervisors. Article "A Megabank Joins the Critics of Urban Sprawl" & "Beyond Sprawl, Toward Sustainable Development". Agenda for the 3/21 Informal meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Copy of letter from Mayor to legislators regarding telecommunications legislation. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Mamh 15, 1995 City Council City Manager Organizational Change -- Equipment Maintenance Effective Mamh 11, 1995, the Equipment Maintenance Division has been moved from the City Manager's office to the Public Works Depadment. Terry Reynolds, Equipment Superintendent, will now report to Chuck Schmadeke rather than to Dale Helling. Further, the Transit Maintenance Shop has been separated out from the Equipment Division and placed within the Department of Parking and Transit. Lloyd Rathke, the Transit Shop Supervisor, will now report to the Transit Manager, Ron Logsden, rather than to Terry Reynolds. I have discussed the possibility of these changes off and on with Dale for some time. I have never been convinced that the equipment maintenance function belonged in my offi,ce and, quite frankly, there are many major projects on the horizon and the Assistant City Manager will be sharing in these new project assignments, Therefore, we decided to make both of these changes. I believe this is in the best interest of the City organization and everyone will benefit by having these maintenance functions more appropriately assigned, CITY OF I0 WA CITY March 16, 1995 The Honorable Mar. y Mascher State Capitol Des Moines, IA 50319 Dear Mary: As a follow-up to my earlier comments about the N&N Sanitation transfer station, there is one fact that is particularly irritating. To the best of my knowledge, any person/company using the N&N Sanitation transfer station would not have to pay the fees for landfill closure, the state surcharge of 94,25 per ton, and the special cleanup fee of ~ 1.25 per ton, which we use to finance our toxic cleanup days, We will still be obliged to provide the services for such toxic/hazardous waste cleanup but the monies would not be available in 'the amounts necessary to finance such a program. We also have financial assurance responsibilities to the state for closure which we now charge ~ 10 a ton for non-city users of the landfill. The non-city user currently pays 953,50 per ton, of which 910 is for closure and post-closure, 84.25 is the state surcharge tax, and 81.25 is for the special cleanup fees. I think you can see that the N&N Sanitation proposal can certainly charge less if they do not have to assume all the financial obligations of the City, The N & N Sanitation proposal competes with the same waste stream we are expected to satisfy as outlined by the State. Sincerely, Stephen J. Atkins City Manager City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 17, 1995 Mayor and City Council Marian K. Karr, City Clerk~~ Council Absences Please notify me if you are planning to be out of town. This information is especially helpful in planning special meetings or possible changes in the summer schedule. Thank you. City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 13, 1995 To: Mayor and City Council From: City Clerk Be: Council Work Session; March 6, 1995 - 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers Mayor Susan Horowitz presiding. Council present: Horowitz, Kubby, Lehman, Novick, Pigott, Throgmorton. Absent: Baker. Staff present: Atkins, Helling, Woito, Karr, Davidson, Miklo, Brachtel, Shaffer. Tapes: 95-37, All; 95-38, Side 1. REVIEW ZONING MATTERS: Reel 95-37, Side 1 St. Planner Miklo presented the following Planning and Zoning items for discussion: Setting a public hearing for March 28, 1995, on an ordinance amendin.q Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoninq," of the City Code by revisinq Article L, entitled "Provisional Uses and Special Exceptions," Section 1M, entitled "Nei.qhborhood Centers," to repeal the access re.quirement for nei.qhborhood centers. Public hearin¢~ on an ordinance amendinq the Conditional Zonin.q Aqreement for 1069 Hi.qhwav 1 (Westport Plaza) to allow an additional freestandinq pylon si.qn. (REZ95- 0002) Public hearinq on an ordinance conditionalIv amending the use re.qulations of approxi- mately 13.09 acres located at 655 Meadow Street from RM-1 2, Low Density Multi- Family Residential, and RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to RS-8, Medium Density Sin.qle-Familv Residential. (East HilI/REZ94-0020) Asst. PCD Director Davidson, Traffic Engineer Brachtel, and City Attorney Woito presented information. Ordinance conditionally amending the use requlations of approximately 13.O9 acres located at 655 Meadow Street from RM-I 2, Low Density Multi-Family Residential, and RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to RS-8, Medium Density Sinqle-Family Residential. (East HHI/REZ94-0020) (First consideration) Resolution approvinq the final plat of D&L Subdivision, a 6.41 acre, four lot commercial subdivision located on the south side of Hiqhway 1 West, west of Sunset Street. 2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS: LEGISLATIVE ISSUES: Reel 95-37, Side 1 Assistant City Manager Helling and Cabte TV Specialist Drew Shaffer presented information' about telecommunications legislative issues. Council requested copies of City correspondence sent regarding telecommunication legislative issues over the past six months, and figures regardi0g the number of households who wat(~h cable access programs. Helling requested that Council Members contact their national legislators regarding the importance and use of the franchise fees. Staff Action: Correspondence over past year sent to Council prior to their departure. (Helling) APPOINTMENTS: Reel 95-37, Side 2 Board of Library Trustees - Jim Swaim Board of Appeals - John Staska Housing Commission - defer until discussion with staff Planning &. Zoning Commission - defer to formal meeting COUNCIL AGENDA/TIME: Reel 95-37, Side 2 Pigott requested that Council continue the public hearing to allow for further discussion of issues. Horowitz stated the Civil Defense meeting is scheduled for March 22 and Pigott will represent Council. (Agenda Item No. 14a - Recommendation of the Board of Appeals.) Kubby asked for input regarding the Board of Appeals by-laws referred to the Rules Committee. (Agenda Item No. 15 - Consider a resolution proposed improvements to the City's wastewater treatment facilities.) In response to Kubby, City Manager Atkins stated he will prepare information regarding relocation, and asked Council to vote on the resolution at the formal meeting. (Agenda Item No. 16 - Resolution road maintenance purposes.) Kubby inquired about road maintenance responsibilities between the City and County and use of chemicals, City Manager Atkins stated he will contact the County. Kubby inquired about correspondence sent to Johnson County Board of Supervisor Lacina regarding industrial park zoning. City Manager Atkins stated Lacina understands the request for industrial park rezoning. Kubby stated the County should be informed about criteria established for industrial parks. Kubby reported on HACAP issues and asked Council to lobby congressional representatives regarding continuance of CSBG funds to HACAP, 3 10. 11. 12. 13. Horowitz reported there will be a public hearing on the Stanley Amendment March 7 at 7:00 p.m. Horowitz asked Council to contact their state representatives and ask them to vote "no" on the Stanley Amendment. Horowitz reported that she and Throgmorton met with Rohret Road neighbors on Saturday morning. Horowitz stated that it was agreed to be gently aggressive with IDOT regarding Maier Avenue/Highway 1 intersection. Majority of Council agreed to hold their scheduled March 20, 1995, Council work session. Thr~gmorton stated he has been in contact with Gretchen Lohman, University of Iowa Student Senate Vice President. Throgmorton stated the Student Senate would like to meet with Council representatives April 8. 11:30 a.m. Horowitz reported that she has asked Council Member Lehman to represent Council on March 14 at University Hospitals to visit with Russian physicians. Novick stated that she met with Russian bankers at First National Bank that day. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 10, 1995 To: From: Planning and Zoning Commiss'.~n ,,j ,/~ · Karin Franklin, Dire-~/~/d'~ Dept. of Planning & CommAnity Development Re: IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000 Iowa City's Vision for the Future Last spring the City Council initiated the IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000 project to determine a path for the City for the next 10 to 15 years. The vision expressed in IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000 will be the basis of a new comprehensive plan for Iowa City. Nine task forces in various topical areas were put together to collectively envision Iowa City's future. The task forces were made up of a broad range of citizens and included some people who had been involved in city government before and many who had not. The task forces were asked to formulate a vision of Iowa City in the future, particularly as it related to the topical area assigned to the individual groups. These groups worked intensively over a two month period and reached consensus on nine different vision statements and goals to carry those statements forward into reality. The enclosed document is a compilation of the work of those nine task forces with the focus being on a vision statement for the City as a whole and statements and goals for the different topical areas. These are broad statements expressing an ideal for our City's future, and general goals. Once this vision is adopted by the City Council, our next challenge will be to develop a specific action plan to reach our vision. Also included in your packet are comments from the various city boards and commissions who have been reviewing "IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000" over the last two months. Most of their responses are relayed to you via their minutes, however I will add some comments to expand upon some of the sketchier minutes. Generally the response of the boards and commissions was positive in that they agreed with the vision put forth. A common response was to suggest specific actions, such as including completion of the Iowa River Bike Trail as a goal. There is a natural inclination to become specific. However, the purpose of this step of the project is to decide as a community the future direction of Iowa City and not to chart the course until we know where we are heading. The Committee on Community Needs discussed the need for diversity in housing and the issue of affordability. There was also some concern about the process for development of a new plan for Iowa City and a desire to look at the views of urban experts relative to ways to implement the vision. 2 The Housing Commission also agreed that there was a need for diversity in neighborhoods. The Commission discussed the possibility of looking at housing and "welfare" issues regionally. It was agreed that the provision of adequate housing was a concern for the larger community of the county and that cooperative efforts among public and private entities was advisable; consensus could not be reached on the use of Iowa City resources for non-residents and the responsibility for leadership in a regional effort, · The Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission spent a portion of two meetings on this project. The minutes of the second meeting are not available yet, Members of the RNAC made the following suggestions: link the Parks & Recreation statement with the Environmental Protection statement through the use of similar language such as wetlands, natural areas, and woodlands; * there should be stronger statements about having a community that is affordable; include specific language about the Iowa River Corridor trail (this was mentioned at the Parks & Recreation Commission also); include industrial areas as connection points in the bikeways and trail systems; in the Cooperative Efforts section, include a statement regarding cooperation with the school system particularly in services for youth and youth involvement (not just low-income youth); and * consider creation of an urban park downtown in which the pedestrian mall is expanded and . automobiles are prohibited from much of downtown. I have also included some input from Paula Brandt, a member of the Housing Task Force (see letter in packet), In melding the work of the task forces, different statements with similar meanings were combined to eliminate redundancies, The essence of goal #3 of the Housing group was intended to come through in the statements under Housing and under Land Use & Urban Pattern. If the point of the original statement has been lost, that was not the intention and it should be restored in one of these sections. Paula may be right, in paragraph 3 of her letter, about a duplicate statement. Please review all of this in preparation for a public hearing on March 1 6. As the Commission charged with making a recommendation to the City Council on the Comprehensive Plan, this review by Planning & Zoning is critical, No amendments have been made to the text based on other board and commission review. Your decisions about the language in this vision statement will be reflected in the document that goes on to the City Council, so please consider carefully if this document describes a vision of Iowa City that you can support. cc: Task Force members City Manager City. Council b~2000b 1owa City Public Library 123 South L~nn, Iowa C~ty, Iowa 52240-1820 Susan Craig, Director Ini'ormat~on (319) 356-5200 Business (319) 356-5206 Fax (319) 356-5494 TO: Karin Franklin FROM: Susan Craig DATE: 1/30/95 RE: Iowa City: Beyond 2000 The Library Board reviewed the draft of Iowa City: Beyond 2000 at their meeting on January 26. They did not have any additions to the document and congratulate you and the task forces on a job well done! Thank you for the opportunity to provide input; it was appreciated by the Board. Committee on Community Needs January 25, 1995 Page 3 ~/"'~DISCUSSION OF THE iOWA CITY BEYOND 2000 VISION PLAN: Karin Franklin briefed the Commission on the Beyond 2000 Vision Plan. Franklin said three or four aspects of the plan are of particular interest to the Committee on Community Needs, the'general, introductory statement of the Plan; the Housing section; the Social Services section; and the economic well-being section. Franklin said a major objective of the plan is the achievement of a community that emphasizes diversity in people, diversity in housing -- including diversity in housing types and diversity in socio-economic classes within neighborhoods, accessibility -- both physical and financial, and the environment. Franklin said one thing to keep in mind is that this document sets out many of the objectives, or visions, on what we want the community to achieve, but it is not very clear about what means will be utilized to meet those objectives. Franklin hopes that much of the specifics about the methods utilized wile ultimately evolve through discussions, mostly at the City Board and Commission level, like the Planning and Zoning Commission. Franklin said many strategies had already been suggested in the discussions of the various task forces, but said these strategies are intended to be released to the Boards or Commissions concerned with these issues at a later date. Martin stated that he tends to work more effectively when ~pecific programs or methods are put before him, rather than dealing with broad theoretical statements. Martin said that he hopes real specific, advocacy of specific points of view will be voiced at some point through- out this process and that many of these points of view will come from very diverse and broad areas, rather than strictly hearing from local experts and hearing conventional wisdom. Martin said no one will be forced to adopt what they hear, he just hopes new methods of achieving the goals might be expressed. Martin also feels the University should have the opportunity to be involved in this process. The Commission appeared relatively open to these points of view. Franklin said that every Board and Commission is welcome to hear from experts in their particular area, but expressed the desire that some closure will be attained from these discussions within a reasonable amount of time. Franklin said if anyone has any comments, feel free to contact her. CITY STEPS UPDATE: Schmuch said the CITY STEPS program was submitted to the City Council last week and that all of the Committee members were present. Schmuch said Pat Jordan from the Emergency Housing Project was present and made a few comments in regards to the plan. Jordan feels that Table 1 in the back of plan misrepresents the percentage of mentally ill hometess individu- als. Schmuch said she assumes that Jordan feels the amount should be higher. Schmuch said- that Milkman had s~id it is a matter of how the Table must be set up, but said this variance will be explained in the narrative of the plan. Schmuch said Jordan had also said she does not feel day shelter is a high priority. Schmuch said those present in the Strategies and Priorities meetings had heard many times that day shelter is a high need and decided to leave the issue as a high priority. Historic Preservation Commission January 10, 1995 Page 5 Swaim said four-to-five pages of guidelines is excessive. Russell said the Commission first needs to focus on the ordinance, then the guidelines. It will be important to denote how the conservation districts will be different from historic districts. He said he read the draft with a view tow.ard regulations and changed things that weren't red-lined. Miklo said the contract says the City can cease payment to the consultants at any time. Russell said if the consultants are fired, they will claim they used the entire amount of time outlined in the contract. Semel said he is concerned that this draft of the ordinance will be difficult to pass. Miklo said the general concept of a conservation district should not be difficult to pass. REPORT ON PROGRESS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK PLANNING ACTIVITIES: Swaim said a Historic Preservation Week meeting will be held Jan. 15. She needs suggestions of properties that would be candidates for awards. Russell said painting, preservation, jurors, sponsors and funding still need to be discussed. Swaim said Rich Taylor is interested in having some events at his property. The Johnson County Court House will be used this year. Russell said there will be no guest speaker this year. Swaim said the practice of having the jurors present the Commission's selections for the painting awards need to be reconsidered, as last year's jurors hadn't seen the slides prior to the presentation. Russell asked who this year's jurors will be. Swaim said Tim Rinders, a design consultant for the Main Street Program, has been suggested by Kerry McGrath, who is also interested. Tim Samuelson, a restorationist from Chicago, has also been suggested. Miklo said a field representative from the Chicago office of the National Trust for His:oric Preservation, as well as a Dubuque Historic Preservation Commissioner, have been suggested. Swaim said Tom Baldwin, and architect with Baldwin & White in Des Moines, and Charles Johnston from Marshalltown are also candidates. Miklo suggested contacting Licht about an architect. JDISCUSSION OF A DRAFT OF THE "IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000 - IOWA CITY'S VISION FOR THE FUTURE" DOCUMENT: Russell said there are sections of the document regarding neighborhoods and historic preservation. He said he and Kelly participated in the committees which drafted the document. Miklo suggested a memo supporting the document, stating it has historic preservation as one of its goals. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1994, MEETING: Semel said paragraph two on page three should be corrected to say Iowa Humanities Board as opposed to Historical Board. MOTION: Hanick moved to approve the minutes of the December 13, 1994 meeting as amended. Semel seconded. Iowa City Historic ~1 '~-~--~ L*~ ~/~ Preser. va.tion ./;~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ommls-i-- ,~// ~ ~ ~%% 41o E. Washln~on St. ......... ~_, -_ Date: January 10, 1995 To: Karin Franklin, Director, Department of Planning and Community Development From: Douglas Russell, Chair, Historic Preservation Commission Be: IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000 At its January 1 O, 1995, meeting, the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the draft of IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000, The Commission noted that the document emphasizes the importance of historic presel~/ation and neighborhood preservation in the future vision for Iowa City, The Commission is glad to see that historic preservation will continue to be an important part of the city's future, We also look forward to working with. you and other citizens to incorporate more detailed policies regarding historic preservation into the Comprehensive Plan Update, It was the consensus of the Commission to endorse the draft IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000, PAGE 2 uphold the Ho~ion to the property at 710 East Jefferson was made by Sandior,' seconded by Eastham. 'Carried 5-0. Affirmative roll call: Sandlet, Harris, Eastham. Absent{ Reilly, McMahon. do a follow-up inspection. Notice of Violation dated December 22, 1994, for Moore, Swenson, Klineloiter will CD HOUSING UPDATE - NASEY - Update of Greenview MHP Nasby stated Greenview MHP is a project developed by the City and a private developer, Bob Wolf to build a manufactured housing park.-This park would allow families located in the flood plain to relocate. City Council continued tl~e Public Hearing to January 17, 1995. - Update Towncrest MHC Nasby stated 32 of 54 total units at Towncrest MHC that need to relocate are out and relocated. Of the 22 remaining units, 6 have been abandoned, with 16 left to assist. COMMENTS CITY STEPS - NASBY NASBY stated the first draft of City Steps has been prepared. City Steps replaces the CHAS. City steps includes services along with housing issues. The Priorities and Strategies given in the Clt~ Steps ca~ne from information received at the public meetings and from members of various boards. The Priorities are to be used to award all requests for CDBG and HOME funds. A Public Hearing will be held January 17, 1995. APPLICATION PROCESS CDBG/HOME - MILKMAN Milkman stated applications for CDBG/HOME funds will be available January 11, 1995 and due February lO, 1995. It is proposed that CCN & Housing Commission hold joint hearings for all requests for housing funds on February 22 and 23, 1995, 6:30-9:30 PM. Housing Commission will discuss all housing requests at their March 14, 1995, meeting. A decision will need to be made on HOME funds, and recommendations to CCN will need to be made for CDBG funds. Applications with a mixture of CDBG and HOME funds will get a higher priority. IOWA C'ITY BEYOND 2000 VISION PLAN - FRANKLIN Franklin stated "Iowa City: Beyond 2000" project is Iowa City's vision for the future and sets the direction the City takes in it's Comprehensive Plan, which will be developed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. There are no federal guidelines or requirements. Task forces were put together and asked to formulate vision statements and goals. The draft of "Iowa City: Beyond 2000" is a complilation of those vision statements and goals that Boards and Commissions are being asked to review and offer comments to Planning & Zoning. MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMA/~ RIGHTS COMMISSION MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 1995 CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Sara Mehlin, Mel Dautremont, Ken Alison Ames Gelstad, Dorothy Paul, Harvey, Joan Jehle, Ann Shires. Gatlin, Patricia MEMBERS ABSENT: Ric Graf STAFF: Anne Burnside and Heather Shank RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chainan, Alison Ames Gelstad called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m.. 2. INTRODUCTION OF JOAN O"EHLE, NEW COMMISSION MEMBER The Chair introduced and welcomed Joan Jehle to the Commission. 3. KARIN FRANKLIN: IOWA CITY BEYOND 2000 Human Rights Karin Franklin, IC Director of Planning and Community Development, came to the Iowa City Human Rights Commission to discuss the document, "Iowa City: Beyond 2000". Ms. Franklin exlolained that a community g~oup, divided into nine task forces, developed vision statements which were then combined into the preliminary document. Ms. Franklin indicated to the Commission that the final document will provide the basis for a new comprehensive plan for the City of Iowa City. The new comprehensive plan will be more visionary than the traditional land use comprehensive plan. Franklin encouraged comments and suggestions from the Commission and oDher groups. Dorothy Paul indicated she would like more time to study the plan before she commented. Ms. Franklin asked that any remarks be sent to her prior to March 1, 1995. Sara Mehlin, a member of the social service task force, mentioned the caring and committed people who worked on the task forces. Alison Ames Galstad asked whether the vision statement would be put in the comprehensive plan. Ms. Franklin indicated that it would and that the plan will be more specific as it becomes more comprehensive. Pat Harvey mentioned that the integration of the 9 task forces was a good start to being able to coordinate, integrate, .and implement the vision in the future. IOWA CITY: BEYOND ~000 REPORT: Requiring Referendum", under which expansion of the Recreation Center or expansion of the Mercer Park Aquatic Center was listed as the number one priority. Gatens stated he felt the city would not have a problem in getting a 60% approval on a referendum for more gym space. Trueblood sta~ed other things needed to be looked at, such as the possibility of other upcoming referendums, and the need for City Counoil's approval to hold a referendum. Another member of the public who did not identify himself stated he was a voice of the community at large. He stated indoor recreational space is a high priority, and it is very difficult to schedule in time and to find space given the City's existing facilities. Vanderhoef stated she appreciated Gatens comments and agreed the city needs more gym space and space for other programs. Beasley indicated he would contact Gatens when a committee is established to pursue additional indoor recreational facilities. Karin Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development, addressed the commission with respect to the "Iowa City: Beyond 2000" report.-She stated the report is the beginning of a process to re-evaluate the city's future, looking to what the city wants to be in the next decade. She stated the city put together a number of task forces to address various areas of the city, who came up with vision statements for each particular area. The report is a compilation of the work of the different task forces and an attempt to crystalize the vision for Iowa City. She stated the report is going to various boards and commissions who are being asked for any input they would like to bring to the document, for suggestions of areas not covered, or concurrence. These comments will be taken to the Planning and Zoning Commission, who has been given the responsibility of making a recommendation to the City Council on the City's comprehensive plan. After the City Council adopts the plan the city will begin working on implementation strategy, setting out specific ways to achieve th~ community as described by the report. She asked for input from the commission. Pruess noted lack of anything on the Iowa River Corridor/Stanley Plan. Franklin stated some items were veDy specific to a particular area or project and those were removed and will be part of the next step, with these items being the basis for the overall plan that will carry it out. She stated staff did not want to get bogged down in specifics at this point, wanting to be more general and visionary. Pruess also was concerned about the lack of references 3 RECREATION DIVISION FEES: throughout the report to technology and the city's role in encouraging expansion of communication, noting he was interested in encouraging expansion of communication with citizens being able to access information through their home computers; i.e., a library without walls. Franklin stated this was a feature included in the Library Strategic Plan, indicating she was not sure where she would include it elsewhere. - Trueblood stated with respect to the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Task Force some items were omitted, such as fostering creative partnerships with neighborhood associations and expansion of cemetery space. Franklin stated these were specific items which would be part of the next phase. Pelton stated bikeways were mentioned and felt they were a potential solution to transportation problems, with Franklin stating alternative modes of transportation were included under the transportation section. Pelton stated he endorsed the process of developing a vision statement and having a long term plan for the city, and commended Iowa City for developing longer term plans. Franklin stated commission members could contact her at her office if they have any individual comments to make. Vanderhoef stated staff did a magnificent job culling from the original task forces and reorganizing it into a very readable document. Trueblood stated that proposed increases in FY96 swimming fees are the only changes from the three-year document developed last year and updated this year. Staff prepared various options for the commission's consideration, specifically relating to swim passes. Trueblood reviewed the various options and what the result of each would be: Option A increased daily admissions by 25 cents and increased fees for punch cards and passes in a proportionate amount; Option B was the same as Option A but swim pass increases were phased in over a two year period; Option C would eliminate summer passes, replacing them with 3-month passes (request to consider 3-month passes coming from City Council); Option D was the same as Option C but with lower prices for 3- month passes, which would result in the projected revenue being reduced by $7,600. He stated the proposed 3-month pass would be valid for approximately 13 weeks whereas the summer pass was valid from Memorial Day to Labor Day, a 14~week season, and the 3-month pass would be good for three months from date of purchase., Vanderhoef stated a Family Pass was a bargain, with Trueblood stating when the family pass was suggested, staff felt it should give a bargain to families to encourage family participation, noting even though the Family Pass may be a bargain, not many of them are sold. Pacha asked staff which opti'on they liked best, with Moran stating staff could live with 4 RIVERFRONT AND NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1994.5:30 P.M. SENIOR CENTER CLASSROOM 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lorry Wilson, Nancy English, Catherine Pugh, Jim Pugh, Richard Hoppin, Courtney Daniels, Jessica Neary, Les Kuehl, Don Otto MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Charlie Oenney, Karin Fran~.lin GUESTS PRESENT: Terry Dahms, Nancy Seiberling CALL TO ORDER, INTRODUCTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chairperson Kuehl called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Kuehl suggested that the Commission had not reached a conclusion about a system of warning buoys on the Iowa River. He asked if Denhey wanted a formal recommendation about the system and whether the City staff has continued work on the system. Denneysaid he knew that Iowa City City Engineer Rick Fosse was continuing to work on the warning system. He said he thought the discussion in the previous meeting covered the topic well; and that the Commission could make a formal recommendation if they wanted to do so. This item was added'to the agenda following election of a vice chairperson. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 21, 1994 MEETING: Wilson submitted grammatical corrections to the minutes. Jim Pugh stated that he didn't like the use of acronyms such as ISTEA in the minutes because it was difficult to decipher them. Schweitzer noted that Don Otto's name had been omitted from the "Members Present" list. The minutes were approved as amended (MCU). DISCUSSION OF IOWA CITY: BEYOND 2000: Franklin explained that the City of Iowa City is the process of updating its comprehensive plan. She said the original plan was created in the 1970's and was a very extensive document. She said updates to the plan had previously sought public participation by sending out notices or surveys that had a very low response rate, and so the staff ended up putting together the plan, She said the plan has historically been heavily focused on land use. Franklin said this year the City staff tried something different and put together 9 talk forces for the 9 different subject areas for the plan. She said she believed the task forces were very successful in producing overall vision statements and specific objectives for the plan. She said she would like comments from the members of RNAC on the vision statements and said that the Open Space task force and the Environmental task force may be of special interest to the Commission. Riverfront & Natural Areas Commission January 18, 1995 Page 2 Franklin said she was going to give the task force results and the comments from all the Boards and Commissions to the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said the members of RNAC can give comments at this meeting or give them to her personally at a later time. Wilson said he would like to hear comments from the RNAC members who had been on the task forces. Hoppin said he had been on the Parks, Recreation and Open Space task force and there had been much emphasis on creating interconnectivity of trails and parks throughout the city, including neighborhoods, schools, and downtown. Hoppin said the task force had also tried to emphasize that open space facilities should be accessible both physically and economically. He said the task force wanted to make sure that any fees were set low enough so they were affordable to everyone. Hoppin said the only real remaining issue was whether the City could accomplish the goals the task force set. Franklin said the goals would be implemented in more ways than just through development policy. She said this update would hopefully coordinate numerous community objectives beyond just planning and zoning. Jim Pugh said he was interested in how the plan would address the issues of interconnectivity · of green space and interconnectivity in regard to the city's fringe area. Wilson said he was impressed that the vision statements included mostly broad issues rather than "potholes". Franklin responded that she had taken the "potholes" out of this document to be addressed later in the implementation phase of the project. Seiberling said she had been on the Environmental Protection task force. She said the process of developing the vision statement was amazing as they started with specific problems, and then the discussion grew outward toward more broad goals. Jim Pugh asked Franklin how the RNAC would be involved in the implementation of the plan. Franklin said the Commission would continue its advisory function as the plan was implemented. Pelton said he would like to see keywords like "riverfront and natural areas" included in the environmental protection vision statement. He said this would provide a more clear link to RNAC's role in the plan, Kuehl asked what the time schedule was for comments about the vision. Franklin said she wants to give as much time as possible for discussion, but she would like to forward the vision and the comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission by March. Kuehl suggested the Commission members may want to take the time before the next RNAC meeting to go over the vision documents more thoroughly. ,Jim Pugh agreed that it would be good to look the document over more now that Franklin has clarified the document and its implementation. Jim Pugh moved that the Commission should include a discussion of the Iowa City: Beyond 2000 on next month's agenda. Wilson seconded. The motion carried unanimously (MCU). 824 N. Gilbert St. Iowa City 52245 22 February 1995 Karin Franklin Planning and Communit~ Development Civic Center Iowa City 52240 Dear Karin, As I was filing away the paperwork from the Housing Task Force for the Beyond 2000 project, I noticed a discrepancy between what our Task Force submitted and what was written in the "Iowa City: Beyond 2000--Iowa City's Vision for the Future" draft. Our original Goal #3 was "Preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods and the historic nature of older neighborhoods." This statement/goal no longer appears as a goal. Naturally. I am disturbed, and wonder what happened to it. Instead, a "new~ goal appears--"Take an active role to ensure diversity of housing types in future growth areas." We did not have that as a separate goal-- indeed, that is stated in the following goal to "Develop planned neighborhoods that support the principle of diversity of both housing types and households, and provide opportunities for interaction among neighbors." By eliminating one goal and emphasizing a sub-statement of a separ- ate goal as a major goal, I believe that our task force's intent has been altered somewhat. I am disappointed that the strategies were not included, since these represented the very heart of our discussions. Still, it was a terrific experience--I enjoyed being on the task force very much. Best wishes, Paula Brandt xc: Marianne Milkman City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 16, 1995 To: City Council and City Manager From:"~adanne Milkman, Community Development Coordinator Re: Relocation of"Showers" Residents Only two households will need to relocate in order to construct the lift station and interceptor sewer line south of Napoleon Park. The Community Development Division has been in touch with these households for some time, and both have already made some plans for relocating. We are currently reviewing the appraisals for the structures involved with the City Attorney's office, and will then put together an assistance packet for each household. We expect the assistance to be very similar to that offered to the Towncrest residents. This relocation process should be relatively simple! NOTE: One tenantin the area who was concemed about having to relocate, will be able to stay put. cc: Chuck Schmadeke Beverly Ogren City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 15, 1995 To: From: Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney Re: Introduction of New Assistant City Attorney I The Honorable Mayor Susan M. Horowitz and Members of the City Council; Department Directors and Division Heads This is to introduce you to my new Assistant City Attorney I, Bevedy F. Ogren. We feel very pleased, and honored, to have Bey join the City Attorney's Office as our foudh attorney, specializing in property acquisition and litigation. Bev has had eight years of general law practice, including three years in a North Dakota private law firm, and also including negotiations and alternative dispute resolution. Bev graduated from Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota, with a B.A. Cure Laude in the Classics, namely Latin and Greek. She went on to complete her J.D. at the University of Nodh Dakota School of Law in Grand Forks, North Dakota, in 1986. She is a person who is "attentive to detail" -- as indicated by her ability to read Latin and Greek, as well as some of her pdor law practice of securities regulation and tax. Bev started in the office on Monday March 13, 1995, and she has already started work on several land acquisition projects and also a First Amendment question. She is down-to-earth, confident, very bright and has a good sense of humor. So please come down and say "Hello" to Beverly Ogren and welcome her to the City. I will be having a '~/Velcome Coffee/Open House" within the next month or so, so stay tuned for further announcement. CC: Beverly Ogren City Attorney Office Staff Sylvia Mejia, Personnel March 10, 1995 CITY OF IOWA CITY Beverly Ogren 2335 26th St. NW Cedar Rapids, IA 52405 Re: Confirmation of Employment; City Attorney I Position- Dear Bey: This is to confirm my offer of employment to you, made via telephone on Friday, March 10, 1995, concerning the above position and accepted that same day. More specifically, you will begin employment at Step 3, Grade 28, in the amount of $35,500. You will be in a probationary status for six months, at which time you will be evaluated; and assuming satisfactory performance, you will be eligible for a 5.5% increase. Additionally, there is an adjustment for cost of living, as well as an increase in the compensation pay plan made July 1, 1995, which will provide you with additional monies. I am very pleased to offer this position to you, and look forward to working with you. As you might have guessed, we have approximately 100 easements and parcels to acquire during this next year, in addition to Magistrate's Court, your share of District Court litigation and other assigned departments and divisions. Looking forward to seeing you on Monday, March 13, 1995, I am Cordially yours, City Attorney cc: Steve Atkins, City Manager Sylvia Mejia, Personnel Administrator Dale Helling, Asst. City Manager City Attorney Office Staff City Council 010 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA J1240.1126 * (119) 356-5000 · FAX (519) J$6-~009 RECEIVED HAR 14 1§95 March 9, 1995 City Council City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 522~0 Dear Councilors: Several facts and seme observations during the last few months prc~t this letter. Once again I ccme from a perspective of what seems equitable. When I first heard that you Councilors receive about $5000.00 a year, I was so shocked I made no response. Late[, I asked someone who said the report was accurate. When recently I was told that the CityManager, with full- time responsibilities, receives about $90,000.00 a year, I again asked someone else to be sure I had heard aright. Realizing that you Councilors receive some variable but measurable amount of material to read every two weeks or so only compounds my disbelief at the inequity between the service you render and the paltry token of appreciation you receive. Out of the many agenda items before you to which I paid attention to only a few in recent City Council sessions, it se~ned apparent to me that to familiarize yourselves with the pros and cons of each topic would take an enormous amount of time. Service to the conmunity is good, but so is respect for the giver. I believe the $5000.00 that you receive is disrespectful not only of the amount of written information with which you must familiarize yourself and of the "unwritten codes" around which all business transpires and within which you are challenged to operate, but also of the time and energy necessary to listen to and/or seek citizen viewpoints. Yours is not a paper or procedure shuffle, but a people responsibility. I have no idea how such change comes about, but I believe a minimun of $1000.00 a month is reasonable, irrmediately and that for considered corrmunity service, more would not be inappropriate. Sincerely, Carol Ann Marlow 50 Amber Lane Iowa Ci.ty, IA 522t~0 MEETING SUMMARY NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE ACTION PLAN COMMITTEE MARCH 1, 1995 PRELIMINARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Judith Klink, Rex Pruess, Dee Vanderhoef, John Watson MEMBERS ABSENT: Deb Liddell STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Bob Miklo, Marilyn Kriz With respect to the meeting summary of February 14, 1995, no corrections or additions were made'and they were approved. MORMON TREK VILLAGE: A 120 foot gas pipeline easement crosses the property at a diagonal. The property is bordered by Highway 218 to the southwest, Mormon Trek Boulevard to the east and Rohret Road to the north. Private streets will provide access throughout the development. The developer is proposing to dedicate the area contiguous to the 120 foot pipeline easement for neighborhood open space. Approximately 1.5 acres of open space, or fees equivalent, are required for this development. Vanderhoef noted in relationship to the Galway Hills development, a trail could run from Melrose along Highway 218 and along Mormon Trek Village or could run along the east boundary of Galway Hills along West High School property through the pipeline easement to Willow Creek Park. Bovbjerg noted Mormon Trek Village is a private development and the developer would most likely provide open space as a private amenity, adding it might be desirable to have an area along the highway dedicated for a trail. Pruess indicated he would prefer that the trail run along the West High school border, away from the highway. Miklo indicated the committee needed to determine if it would want dedicated the area along the pipeline easement or an area along the perimeter or fees in lieu of dedication. He noted a trail would be put in regardless by the developer but that it most likely would not be open to the public, with the homeowners association maintaining it. Watson felt the strip was too small and narrow and did not fit the needs of neighborhood open space, suggesting acceptance of an sufficient area along the easement for a trail and requesting fees to fulfill the remaining requirement. Bovbjerg stated the developer ~nd city should work together to put in a trail and small recreation area. Watson stated people would view this as a private area and it would only be used by people l~ving in this development. He felt the developer/homeowners association would provide playground equipment in this area. Vanderhoef indicated the committee could recommend obtaining the entire easement if the developer would help develop a trail during construction, with Watson stating the city would have to maintain it when in reality it would be used by the private community and the homeowners should determine how they want to use the area, develop amenities and maintain it. Vanderhoef noted the other possibility was to accept a sufficient amount of land to provide a trailhead at both the north and south end of the easement and land sufficient for a 16 foot wide trail through the pipeline easement; all members, with the exception of Bovbjerg, supported this. Bovbjerg felt the city should obtain the entire easement, with the city maintaining it. The committee would also like to provide access via an 8 foot sidewalk on the south end of the easement to Mormon Trek Boulevard to get to Kiwanis Park. Vanderhoef asked if the committee was receptive to letting the developer build the trail in lieu of paying fees. The committee was agreeable to letting it count towards the payment and giving credit for the amount of land given for the trail system. GALWAY HILLS: After reviewing the pre-preliminary plan, the committee recommended accepting only two of the five parcels the developer would like to dedicate for open space; the northeast parcel and southern parcel proposed for stormwater detention. A trail head could be developed at the northeast parcel, with a trail running along the east border' (West High School property), connecting to the south parcel. With respect to linkage between the two parcels the committee does not want the trail to be on sidewalks or along streets. The committee would also like the developer to dedicate additional land for open space which is flat, above the high water mark, and contiguous to the south parcel. Vanderhoef stated she would take the above two recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their approval at its meeting tonight. ADS PROPERTY: Vanderhoef reported the Longfellow Neighborhood Association has sent a letter to the City Council requesting the city to initiate purchase of property adjoining the east and west sides of Ralston Creek and along the railroad track at the ADS site. At the last committee meeting it was noted the committee was not in a position to spend a large amount of money, feeling land along the creek and railroad track would eventually be dedicated to the city. Bovbjerg stated she would be interested in determining how much the land might sell for to see ~hether the developer and city could work together to purchase additional land that would not be dedicated that would enhance the use of this area. Watson stated there is a parkland deficit of 2.3 acres in this area, noting it would be desirable to obtain areas on both sides of the creek and along the railroad track. The position of the committee is if the developer approached the committee to go together as a shared purchaser of additional land the committee would be willing to consider it at that time. 2 SEW~ T~RLqCKLINE: Vanderhoef reported she put in a request to the city to consider the possibility of putting a connection under Gilbert Street as it gets torn up for this project, providing a safe way to cross Gilbert Street.to Napoleon Park. SNYDER CREEKWATERSHED: A trail from Napoleon Park to the proposed new soccer field complex at the south treatment plant is desirable. Watson stated a trail could basically follow the sewer trunk line easement, with Moran stating some of the land is privately owned along this easement and would need to be purchased. According to the ~OS plan there is a 9.25 acre deficit around Wetherby Park. Vanderhoef noted the plan should be updated to include the total acreage of Sycamore Farms and Windsbr Ridge. FUR~"dER UPDATES NEEDED: It was noted Kiwanis Park needs to be included in the total acreage of the Willow Creek watershed, and with respect to Ryerson's Woods a separate watershed area created or including it in the Willow Creek watershed. The next meeting is scheduled for 3:30 p.m., Tuesday, April 4, at the Recreation Center. APPROVED Minutes PATV Board of Directors Thursday, January 19, 1995, in Meeting Room C of the Iowa City Public Library: Present: Doug Aliaire, Greg Easley, Derek Maurer, Scott Murray, Larry Quigley, and Steve Wurtzler. Staff: Sarah Dan:i,~lles, Colin Ives, Ren~ Paine, Brad Parkel, Megan Rile, and Mark Weills. Library: Beth Fisher. Absent: Vicky Grube, Derrick Honore, and Maureen McCormick. Aliaire called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. Minutes: On a motion by Quigley and Easley, the December minutes were approved as amended. Board Announcements: Murray commented on recent and continuing congressional hearings on federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Maurer complimented the staff for its work on the recent PATV Newsletter and informational brochure, which were included in the Board packet for January. Reports: BTC: The commission did not meet in December for lack of a quorum. Its January meeting has been rescheduled for Jan. 30. Allaim commented that in his most recent conversation with Cable Administrator Drew Shaffer, Shaffer expressed confidence the refranchising process would · reach a satisfactory conclusion. Library: Fisher repoded that about thidy people attended an informational meeting on the sesquicentennial project Jan. 11. The steering committee for the project will meet Jan. 26, and another public meeting is scheduled for Feb. 21. Chair: Aliaire announced committee assignments for PATV Board members. After some slight adjustments, the final committe assignments are as follows: Administrative committee: Aliaire, Easley, and Wurtzler. Financial committee: Grube, Honore, and McCormick. Outreach committee: Maurer, Murray, and Quigley. Aliaire suggested priorities for each of the committees. The administrative committee should develop criteria and strategies for recruitment of new Board members; the financial committee should develop fundraising strategies; and the outreach committee should support elfotis to promote awareness of PATV in the community. He also called on the Board to develop a procedure to evaluate the Director's job performance. To begin this task, each committee should meet and choose a chairperson, and these committee chairs will compose an evaluation committee. Management: Paine asked PATV staff members to introduce themselves to the Board. She then distributed a letter the Alliance for Community Media sent to its member organizations asking for contributions to support its lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C. For a contribution of $500 or more, ACM will regularly update donors on legislative developments pertaining to community access. Several staff and board members supported the idea of contributing $500; a motion by Quigley and Easley to do so was tabled in order that the issue could be taken up under new business (See New Business, below). Paine also reported the ACM will hold its national conference in Boston July 5-8; several staff members will consider attending the conference. Also, Paine distributed draft copies of the revised PATV Employee Handbook. She asked Board members to read the draft revision for later action. One item requiring prompt attention, however, is her proposal to include any employee who works an average of twenty hours per week in the health insurance plan; this would be a slight change from the current policy of including only those employeers who work at least twenty hours per week. She feels the budget can support this change. (See New Business, below.) Also, Parkel distributed a table of bids he obtained from vendors on a list of equipment PATV will purchase. This equipment includes a new Panasonic S-VHS camcorder; a simple lighting kit and accessories; and a new Panasonic S-VHS playback deck. After discussion, and on a motion by Quigley and Wurtzler, the Board authorized staff to purchase the equipment from the lowest bidder, which will be either B&H Photo of New York City or ECS of Davenport (ECS's bids had not been received in time for the Board meeting). Finally, Paine asked Board members with e-mail accounts to supply staff with their e-mail addresses if they wished to receive information electronically from PATV. There were no committee repods. Old Business: There was no old business. New Business: The Board discussed the merits of contributing $500 to ACM's lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C., on behalf of local access organizations. No one expressed reservations about supporting ACM with an additional contribution-- PATV already pays $250 annually for membership in ACM--but some individuals felt $500 was too much. Quigley and Easley accepted a friendly amendment to their original motion, reducing the contribution to $250 with an equal amount to be devoted to generating community awareness of the threat proposed legislation poses to community access. PATV will also forward any small contributions from Access Center users to ACM. The Board then approved the motion as amended. Aliaire asked the outreach committee to take up the question of how best to use the additional $250. 2 On a motion by Maurer and Wurtzler, the Board approved adding PATV employees who work an average of twenty hours per week to the health insurance benefits package. Colin Ives reported on his investigation into the possibility of developing remote control technology that would permit people with certain disabilities to more easily use camcorders. He consulted with technicians at the Gilette Technology Center, who are very interested in such a project. Gilette Technology Center, however, will not provide grant writing services to seek support. Ives also contacted the Sharp corporation regarding the project. While Sharp manufactures equipment using similar technology, that company is not interested in donating equipment for the project. Ives distributed a letter he wrote to the MacArthur Foundation informing it of his proposal, and has consulted locally regarding seeking grant support. Maurer distributed some materials about Iowa Shares, a statewide fundraising organization for local and statewide non-profit organizations in Iowa. He reported that another Iowa City group, Environmental Advocates, has joined Iowa Shares and campaigned successfully to have the University of Iowa permit employees to donate to Iowa Shares through payroll deductions. Maurer asked the Board members to consider joining Iowa Shares as a means both of fundraising and of building a local constituency for PATV. Wurtzler repoded that some language in a draft agreement between Iowa City and TCI concerns him. The language would apparently permit the city to fund community programming with monies allocated to PATV's budget under the agreement. Aliaire agreed to raise the issue with city staff. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at about 9:45 p.m. 3 A/~EI~ICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Annexation Primer for Planners · . : Annexations, iWork .... HOw I By Mitt]tile Gregory Annexation is the traditional way a municipality expands its territorial limits and jurisdictional powers. Though the practice has proliferated mostly over the last 50 years, cases reached the courts as early as the mid-1800s, when land grabs were vigorously sought to develop the railroads. To many environmentalists, open space advocates, property rights advocates, and proponents of self-incorporation, annexation constitutes blatant [and ?eculation by local government. In fact, this has been the rimtire behind many annexation attempts. At first glance, annexation does appear to be a major contributor to sprawl. In most instances, however, annexation is a reaction to sprawl. There is a compelling argument that anyone involved io growth control can appreciate: annexation seeks to control development. Though it certainly does not stop development tbr an extended period of time, it can ensure I!~,' [] Pxtratorrltorlal Jurisdiction: ~ :~ ~_. Cannot vote in any Austin municipal el,?ion. j~)' I~J Limited.purees an~xed ~,. Can vote onZy in Austin Ci~ Council and cha~er amendment elations ~,' - ~ [.!l-pu;ose annexed a~ (uci~ limits"): ~ ~::' u~ vote in all c~ elections. that development takes a slower. more guided path. Unpopular as the expansion of city territon.' may be among those distrustful of a mun icipality's intentions. it can' he argued titat, if and when growth around a city's periphery is inevitable, it should at least be orderly. serviceable, and equitable. These three standards are ~fieo most efficiently achieved by the core municipality under the direction of specific state statutes. The challenge' lies in cratiing a state statute that protects, to the lidlest extent possible. the interests of those whose property is being annexed. The clrcumstauccs that precipitate anncxatiou are numerous. nd the process by which it is rcgnL. cd varies ~rcmendously by state. -['his issue of Zoni,tg News ahm m acqnaim d~c reader with cite iasoes and trends in annex.area LIw today. NlsetJ on recent rdevam cases throughml~ diL' ~cmU[ry. Ho~'cver. a municipality shlmld confirm that any annexation proceeding complies fully with state statutes. Similarly, a landowner or resident challengfi~g an anuexation proposal or petithming for annexation should consult state statutes fi]r guidance. These laws are set up to protect their interests. Consent end Contiguity majority of some cmnbination of the landowners and re%idcnt% of tile territory. 'l'hi~ zs hascd (m [l~c thndamenul nntiun uf'~elJL determination rm)tcd io the U.S. (;onstitucio11. The only tamplowly or alntmt complctdy xnmmndcd hv the city.' Virginia .red h,dLma have the hmadcx~ provi~im~ fi~r i~vohnua~y J 0o0 anncxanon~..cliowing judicial review upon challenge. In Virginia, the tc~I hcforc the cuurt can be as broad as "the best interests of the people" (1ft. Cbde A,n. 15. I -I0,~ I(b)). Cm~scm must bc achieved d~rough a series of public hearings. notifications, und rct~rcnda. The specific procedures statutes tbt exact requirements. evidence that a contiguous boundaD' exists be~een the municipality and ~he tcrrito~. This is intended to prevent patchwork jurisdictional development and to keep municipal expansion orderly and efficient. In Virginia. noncontigoous land may beannexed provided ics ~o more than three miles flora the municipal¥s border. But most states define contigui~' ~ a percentage of the territom's border. Because the fundamental notions o ~elf-determination and orderly development are statutorilv protected scheming municipalities have gone to great {engths {o manufacture consent and condgui~ when they are partictdarly desirous of a properS. Because consent is usually defined ~ a majori~ of landowners and/or a majori~ of the residents in the area, it is possible fhr a municipali~ {o draw its proposed annexation boundaries to ensure majori~ approval. In these c~es, consent ~s n]anu£acturcd through the annexation ofa toc,d area greater than that really desired because the owners ot residents of the added property tip the vote in flyor of anncxathm. This issue was hotly disputed in the case of Village o/'5outh Barrington, 28') N.E.2d (Ill. App. Cs. 1972), although the court held the practice was valid. Muuicipal abuse of annexation powers has also manifested itsell' in "strip annexation." This occurs when a jurisdiction arerexes a corridor of land that juts out from its borders, usually a road or highway, so that it may subsequently annex the desired parcel at the other end. The courts have much more frequently invalidated this Nature misuse of the contigui? reqoiremcnt. For details, see Cherry Valley Fire ?roteaton Din. v. City of Rockfira: 256 N.E.2d 653,658 (III. App. Cs. 1970). In Colorado, strip annexation is expressly permitted a~ long as'the strip's length does not exceed three miles· The assumption is that the requirement of volurea .ry consent will ensure that only willing owners are annexed regardless of contiguiLy. This appears to place little significance on the need for orderly expansion. Whc~t is the Motivcition? The most important issue to clati .1~ up front is the motivation of the party desiring the annexation, An anuexation may be proposed The intricacies of annexation law vaq tremendously, and amrexationt continue to be challenged and amended. All partles should confirm with their attorneys that they are proceeding in accordance with state $tatutes. Thfi can $ave a good dealof time, bad publidty, and money. The list below contains a few notavorthy Inadequate Notification of Intent to Annex A city's effort o annex land is null and void where the annexanon petitions failed rn d~tibe the land to be annexed and failed to include it on the shaded area of the annexation plat. South Carofi3~a, 1992 44ZD303. Self-Incorporation A school disrtiet's petition to become a borough by incorporating is properly denied when based on the nonstamroty factor that granting the petition would isolate portions of the school disttict's present township. &nmylvania Court of Appeals, 1990. 42 ZD 35. A statute exempting charter townships from annexation to any condguo~ city- or village does not ptohibit a village within the chatter township {':tom incorporating to become a home rule city. Michigan Court off'Appeals, 1993. 45 ZD 46. Contiguity An arterupt to reach outlying subdiwsions by annexing a 7 41 -fun strip offand parallel and contiguous to a municipal boundary. plus an additional 1.500-foot strip that did not touch the existing boundan', does not meet the contigui y requ reineat, although it satisfied the state statute's litetal requirement. North G~rolina, Court flAppeals, 1990. 42 ZD 209. When annexation i~ void because of lack of contiguity with the city boundaries, related retorting ordinances are also void. Colorado Court of Appeals, 1992. 44 ZD 24Z Involuntary Annexation A statute permitting a municipality to annex test ory through a legislatively approved decision. without petmining the affected owners to vote on the issue, is constitutional. Oregon, 1991. 43 ZD 89. Pet'clones s Interest A petition for incorporation may be granted although the pethiones. the sole landowner, is motivated in part by a desire to avoid the challenges to annexation law thas has,e been reported in APA ~ lmnd U~e Law & Zoning Digen dace 1990 aM may provide an added renee of the direction the coum are taking and situations where caution is required. Case numbers are the Zoning Digest citations, which provide a more detailed synopsis of each case. zoning regulations of the township. Penno. lvania Court of Appeab, 1990. 42 ZD 245. 'When landowners submit a voluntary annexation request to one village, it takes precedence over another village's prior but unadopted involuntary proceeding. Illinois Court of Appea& 1991. 43ZD,14. Orderly Growth Annexation of a property lying in the path of growth is reasonable where the town can provide services to the ptopetty and the owners of the property currently benefit from their proximi? to the town. MinintppL 1990. 42 ZD 67. State Annexation Procedures The initiative of an ordinance that removed a ~grcenbelt" area around a ciD' from the land-use element. and required voter approval of an amendment to the land.use element before the city could annex the land in the area· is invalid became it conflicts with sum annexation procedures. Cali~rnia C}utt of Appeals. 1990. 42 ZD II9. Sen. ice Provision A towds fadufo to connect annexed land to the town sewer lines constitutes an unconstitutional taking and deprives the owners of equal protection. Officials do not have immunity where the annexation order required connection within five years. U.S. trial, Virginia. 1990. 42,ZD 40. A city maycondition the provision of sewer services beyond its borders on the landowners' agreement to consent to future annexation efforts. Wadnngton, 1994. 46 ZD 98. Dueling Municipalities A municipality can have its airport disconnected from an adjacent municipality when doing so would not unteamnab{y disrupt the adjacem municipality's growth prospects or unduly harm its future tax revenue. Illinois Court of Appeals. 1993 45 ZD I I I. by a municipal corporanon, hndowncrs. or a group of residents. Tbc classic scenario involves a core munidpaliry trying to annex peripheral land chat may or may not already be developed to some level ofimcnsiry. In this scenario, the municipality is likely to bc nodrated either by its desire to gain control over the partern of development surrounding its boundary, by its desire to broaden its tax revenue base. or, most likely, by both. In an effort to thwart hnd grabs, states are now moving to adopt criteria concerning the level ofdevdopmem required to jusd~ annexation. The goal of this nend is to set objective statutory criteria that define when unincorporated land has reached a threshold of urbanization that warrants its incorporation into the rig'. so that ir may be properly zoned and serviced. But annexation also means an increase in the service boundary. l'br the annexing municipality, which translates to greater costs. In most states, the municipality must promise some combination of basic services such as svater, sewer, fire, police, and garbage collection in exchange for the annexation. Breach of this promise has left annexed territories high and dry in the past, but an increasing number of states are now requiring mandatory municipal assurances. Some states require a municipality to submit a plan of services before the annexation is granted. Oklahoma, Wyoming, North Carolina, Indiana, and Texas all require some type of plan. North Carolina and Indiana also require a cost estimate and a financing plan for service provision. Regardless of the statutory requirements, a territory should reserve its consent for a full guarantee of services that also ensures that the scope and quality of services will be equivalent to those in a city's current jurisdictioti. Most important, property owners and residents should exact a time frame for service provision (see box). The growing use of concurrency laws is also helping to guarantee the provision of ,ervices. Regardless of the state's provisions, a property owner should ensure her interests with an annexation agreement that obligates all parties involved to comply. The second annexation scenario involves rive municipalities competing for the same unincorporated land. The motives here are similar to those mentioned above but are complicated by the fact that both municipalities claim the land is in their natural path of development. Further, proper study and planning for the area are often compromised by haste because, in many states, the courts determine the winner of the duel by determining who initiated the annexation proceedings first. However, the courts have rejected this method when landowners in the territory being annexed express a preference toward the other municipality. The third scenario involves a petition by the owners or inhabitants of the urbanizod, contiguous territory. In this situatioo. the stakeholders. or at least the majority of them, wish to avail themselves of the services the core municipality can provide. '[hey may also want to be able to vote within the city jurisdiction that they perceive as already having an impact on them, or they may want their property values enhanced. Whatever their motivation, to them it is worth, the corresponding property tax increase. Selective Annex~tion Contrary to popular belief, municipalities are not always receptive to annexation. In fact, in states where the annexor is not reqnired to incorporate contiguous land, despite strong petition, cities have successfully avoided tire addition of areas they deemed unfavorable. This may be due to the area's poor economic hcahh, cnvironmemal health. racial composition, or crime icyel. (For/hrther reading on the history ofselettive annexation, see Donald Hagman et al.. "The White Curtain: Racially Disadvaotaging kocal Government Boundary Practices," UniversCi of Detroit Journal of Urban Law. Vol. 54 [ 19771.) Thmtgh cities have traditionally had the right to refuse petitioned aoncxations, there has been progress in proveming a mnnicipaliry's selective, inequitable alSplication of its annexation powers. Indiana has a provision authorizing the court re fir tee annexalien if the territory. seeking annexation meets these specific urbanization standards: II Essential municipal services and ficilities are not available to residents. n The municipality is physically and financially able to provide municipal services to the territory. ~" The rcrritory's population density is at least three persons · The territory is contiguous to the municipality. Similarly, California law allows an independent boundary commission appointed by the state to overrule a municipaliry's refusal to approve an annexation. The Annexation Study The goal of an annexation study is to determine the costs and benefits associated with tire proposed annexation. Typically conducted by the munlcipali~'. the study seeks generally to define the area proposed for annexation in terms of current land area, land uses, population, buildings, and the level of services already being provided. This information is used to project the costs o( assuming the responsibility for current sen'ices, as well as adding those needed, against the properry tax revenues to be gained. Fire and Emergency Protection Police Protection Sewage Disposal Water Supply Storm Drainage Refuse and Garbage Collection and Disposal Public Transportation Health Protection Street Paving and Maintenance Snow Removal Schools Street Lights Libraries Parks and Recreation Traffic Lights, Signs, and Markings Planning. Zoning, and Building Regulations h is practical to break otn costs of services according to {and- use types because that is the classification used to calculate projected property taxes. For undeveloped land, the possibiliry of of%thing costs with development exactions must also be tittered in. Any municipal anncxatioo study should include a detailed schcdnle for the extension of services. broken down by service. For more details about conducung an annexation study. see the old but very practical Planning Advisory Service Report 114,/blnexation Studies(American Planning Association. 1958) or Fhe Fiscal hnpact Ha,dbook by Robert XX/. Burcheil and David Listokin ('Fire Center for Urban Policy Research, 1978). Zoning for Proposed Annexation Once a property is targeted ~r annexation. it may be temporarily zoucd through the city's extraterritorial spitere of inllucnce. Policies un extraterritorial zoning vary hy s[asc aod the level uf urbaoizatimr. These ,:one:, are comumnly called districts. and deferred dcvch)pmenc districts. fitterira Zones. These zones have the shortest life and usually respose development moratoria until all the planning activities assucLucd with an annexation proceeding can be accmnplishcd. This may include the annexation srt~dy itself, the land-use plan. or the developmere of'procedures fi~r development review once the interim has expired. Typically, an interim zone becomes a holding tone after six to 18 months if the annexation has not yet become effective. Interim zones have been challenged on the basis of short-term takings. however. Berri, Brett W,, "Annexation and Municipal Voting Rights," Washblgton Universlty ]ournal of Urban and Contemporary Law, Vol. 35, (Summer 1989), pp. 237-248. Burkhart, Lori A., "Municipal Annexation: An Update on Issues and Controversies." Public Utilities Fortnightly, Vol. 127, no. 9 (May 1. 1991),p. 4L Bushnell, Darcy S., "Deannexatlon: ^ Proposed Statute," New Mexico Law Review, Vol. 20, no. 3 (Summer 1990), pp. 713-736. Johnson, Gary T., "Tax-sharing as an Alternative to Annexation: A Virginia Case Study,' Urban Law and Policy, Vol. 7, no. 3 (Sept. 1985), pp. 243-254. Reynolds, Laurie, "Rethinking Municipal Annexation Powers," The Urban Lawyer, Vol. 24, no. 2 (Spring 1992), pp. 247-30. Holding Zones. Municipalities establish zones to hold development to a minimum until they have adopted plans for capital facilities and zoning. Holding zones usually have a shorter lifetime than growth reserve tones. with the prcsnmption that development is going to occur within the near future. A city may assign the holding zone its most restrictive, least intcnsive zoning classification. But this method may result in scattered development density later on. once the permanent zoning classificanons are applied pursuant to annexation. Another ahernadve is simply to assign the zoning code of the adjacent i0corporatcd land. but this may not always be appropriate. Regardless of which zoning dassificati0n ~s ubimatcly assigned. the most prudent bur labor-intensive treatment of preannexation land is offbred by Cbades Reed. editor of The ,i Zoning leeport. He suggests, in the October 1990 issue. that planners include a provision'in their holding zone that requires a th[I inventory of the land ant{ structures in the holding zone prior to the effi_'cnve date of annexation. [n this way, the legal ( status of each exi~dng use and structure according to the prior applicable regulations (usually that of the unincorporated, township or county} is ascertained and tested against the new municipal zoning, whatever that may be. With this approach, the degree to which a use or structure already is or eventually will be "nonconfbrming" may be determined as early as possible. Owners can then be notified properly, giving them the most time possible either to bring their property into conformity or to appeal. Grolvth Reserve Zones. These are vacant areas, usually larger 'in area than holding zones. They often surround the holding zone and are intended to reserve the outer limits of the territory to be annexed for long-term growth needs. The growth reserve zone is frcqucndy the result of negotiated agreements bev, veen unincorporated counties or townships and the ntunicipaliry. Irs immediate function is to reduce the level of competition among municipalities and the resulting manipulation by developers seeking to negotiate the best deal. Uses allowed in these zones are usually limited to agriculture or forestry. For more details on the standards and practices for extraterritorial zones, consult the article by Reed. The Annexation Agreement The annexation agreement is a binding contractual agreement titat serves to protect the interests of all parties, private and public. Agreements are mandatory in some states, but they are highly recommended in any case. They can be negotiated at any point prmr to the annexation but generally take effect at the same time. Agreements are primarily used to assure that the agreed services are provided, but they can also be used to secure specific zoning classifications, historic preservation efforts, design standards, and environmental responsibility. ax amRe/9orts Downtown: A Vision for the Future l/rllage of Glenview. 1225 Waukegan Road. Glenview. IL 60025. frole 17 1994. 50pp. b3'ee. Glenview is an af}luent snburb [tortlt of Chicago that ['5.ces near-term challenges concerning potential private reuse of much of the Glenview Naval Air Station. This document examines the fhture of the downtown, its cconum~c vualiLy, traffic patterns, and needed zoning adaptations. Design Review ~ Board Handbook Phmning Department. Toton of Amhersc Town Hall. 4 Boltwood AI,e., Amherst, MA 01002. A,gust 199,~. 26 pp. $2.50 plus S I p.st,tge. This ~implc booklet aimx to let property roynets know what m expect f}om Amherst's design review board. This college town adnptcd design review as part uf iu zoning ordinance in 1983. q'Jus current mauu.d is a revision of the handbook. To: I06/fi CITY CLERff From: Ooard of Supervisors 3-8-95 4:12pa p. Z o? 9 Johnran Count.- Charles D. Duffi~, Chairperson Joe Bolk¢om Stephen P. La¢ina Don Sehr Sally Slutsman BOARD OF SUPERVISORS March 9, 1995 FORMAL MEETING 1. Call to order 9:00 a.m. Agenda 2. Action re: claims 3. Action re: informal minutes of February 28th recessed to March 2nd and the formal minutes of March 2nd. 4. Action re: payroll authorizations 5. Business from the County Auditor. a) Action re: permits b) Action re: reports c) Other 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 To: IO~ CITY CLERK From: Boord of' Supervisors 3-R-9§ 4:12pa p. 3 of 9 Agenda 3-9-95 Page 2 9:30 a.m. - Public Hearing on Zoning and Platting Applications: a) First and Second consideration of the following applications:' Zoning .t Application Z9502 of Dorothy Rebal Estate, Dean & Dale Rebal, Executors, Solon, signed by Dean Beranek of MMS Consultants Inc., requesting rezoning of 1.99 acres from A1 Rural to RS Suburban Residential of certain property described as a portion of Lot 3 of Rebal's First Subdivision located in the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 6; Township 80 North; Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This property is located on the west side of Dillon Furrows Road NE, approximately 1/2 of a mile north of its intersection with Highway 1 NE in Newport Twp.). Application Z9503 of Betty 8edlacek, Iowa City, requesting rezoning of I. 10 acres from A1 Rural to RS Suburban Residential of certain property described as being in the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 26; Township 80 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This property is located on the south side of Newport Road NE, in the SE quadrant of Prairie du Chien Road NE and Newport Road NE in Newport Twp.). Application Z9504' of Arthur Bender, Wellman, Ia, requesting rezoning of 1.00 acres from A1 Rural to RS Suburban Residential of certain property described as being in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 8; Township 78 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This p~operty is located on the north side of 480th Street SW, approximate!y 360 feet west of its intersection with Calkins Road SW in Was~ngton Twp.). To: [0~ ¢TT¥ CLERK Fpom: I;oard of Supervisors 3-8-0§ 4:lEpa p. 4 or 9 Agenda 3-9~95 Page 3 b) Discussion/action re: the following Platting applications: Application S9460A of Eldon T. & Nelda Miller, signed by Dean Beranek of MMS Consultants Inc., requesting preliminary plat approval of Joetown Acker Heim Estates, Part Two, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28; Township 78 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 22 lot, 17.35 acre, residential subdivision, located on the east side of' Chambers Avenue SW, south of the intersection of Chambers Avenue SW and Angle Road SW in Washington Twp.). Application S9467 of Susan Brosh requesting preliminary and final plat approval of Brosh Subdivision, a subdivision located in the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 11; 'township 81 North; Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a l-lot, 2.05 acre, residential subdivision, located on the west side of White Oak Avenue NE, approximately 1/4 of a mile south of the intersection of White Oak Avenue NE and 130th Street NE in Cedar Twp.). Application S9484 of Eldon T. Miller requesting final plat approval of Joetown Acker Helm Estates, Part Two, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28; Township 78 NorIll; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 22-1ot, 17.35 acre, residential subdivision, located southeast of the intersection of Angle Road SW and Chambers Avenue SW in Washington Twp.). Application S9487 of Thomas R. Alberhasky, signed by Robert D. Mickelson, requesting preliminary and final plat approval of A Subdivision of Lot 1, Ramer Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 30; Township 79 North; Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2qot, 10.40 acre, residential subdivision, located on the east side of Sioux Avenue SE, approximately 1/2 mile south of the intersection of Sioux Avenue SE and Highway 6 SE in Scott Twp.). To: IO~ACIT¥ CLERK From: Board of Sopervisors 3-8-9§ 4:JZp~ p. 5 of 9 Agenda 3-9-9~ Page 4 5. Application 89490 of Karen Harris requesting preliminary and f'mal plat approval of Ball's Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of'Section 3; Township, 78 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (Ibis is a 1-lot, 4.00 acre, residential subdivision, located on the east side of Oak Crest Hill Road SE, approximately 1/8 of a mile north of the intersection of Oak Crest Hill Road SE and 480th Street SE in Liberty Twp.). Application S9503 of Scott M. Rohret requesting preliminary and 'final plat approval of Scott Rohret's First Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 17; Township 79 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 1-lot, 2.34 acre, residential subdivision, located on the east side of Black Hawk Avenue SW, approximately 1/4 of a mile north of the intersection of Black Hawk Avenue SW and 400th Street SW in Hardin Twp.). Application S9504 of Betty Bream requesting preliminary and £mal plat approval of Bream's Windy Ridge Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 9; Township 79 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a Mot, 44.72 gcre, residential subdivision, located on the north side of IWV Road 8W, approximately 3/8 of a mile west of the intersection of IWV Road SW and Eagle Avenue SW in Hardin -8. Application S9505 of Stanley Stutzman requesting preliminary and /inal plat approval of Terrace Acres, Part Three (A Resubdivision of Lot 4 of Terrace Acres, Part Two), a subdivision located in the NE 1/4 of the SE I/4 of Section 11; Township 78 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 48.16 acre, residential subdivision, located on the west side of Cosgrove Road 8W, approximately 1/10 of a mile north of the intersection of Cosgrove Road SW and Angle Road SW in Washington Twp.). To: [0NA CZTY CLEI~K From: Board of' Supervisors 3-8-95 4:l~pr~ p. § o~ 9 Agenda 3-9-95 Page 5 9. Application S9506 of Bernard Beranek and David & Julie Flatjord requesting preliminary and final plat approval of A Resubdivision of Lots 22, 23 and 24 of Indian Hills, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the 8W 1/4 of Section 13; Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 3-1or, 4.94 acre, residential subdivision, located on the west side of Arapaho Trail NE which is south of Mohawk R6ad NE, approximately 3/4 of a mile east of the intersection of Mohawk Road NE and Hickory Hollow Road NE in Jefferson Twp.). 10. Application S9507 of Bernard Beranek requesting preliminary and final plat approval of A Resubdivision of Lots 3 and 4 of Indian Hills, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 13; Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 4.72 acre, residential subdivision, located at the south end of 8equoyah Drive NE which is south of Mohawk Road NE, approximately 3/4 of a mile east of the intersection of Mohawk Road NE and Hickory Hollow Road NE in Jefferson Twp.). 11. Application S9508 of Bernard Beranek requesting preliminary and f'mal plat approval of ^ Resubdivision of Lot 20 and Outlot B of Indian Hills, a subdivision located in the 8E 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 13; Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 5.27 acre, residential subdivision, located in the northwest quadrant of Iriquios Drive NE and Arapaho Trail NE which is south of Mohawk Road NE, approximately 3/4 of a mile east of the intersection of Mohawk Road NE and Hickory Hollow Road NE in Jefferson Twp.). 12. Application S9509 of Bernard Beranek requesting preliminary and final plat approval of A Resubdivision of Lots 26 and 27 of Indian Hills, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section To: IO~A CITY CLERK From: Board of Superviaors 3-8-9§ 4:12pa p. 7 of 9 Agenda 3-9-95 Page 6 13; Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. [This is a 2-lot, 5.08 acre, residential subdivision, located on the cost side of Arapaho Trail NE which is south of Mohawk Road NE, approximately 3/4 of a mile east of the intersection of Mohawk Road NE and Hickory Hollow Road NE in Jefferson Twp.). 13. Application S9511 of Jeff McDowell requesting preliminary and £mal plat approval of McDowell Subdivision, a subdivision located in the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 21; Township 80 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 10.12 acre, residential subdivision, located on the south side of West Overlook Road NE, approximately 1/2 mile east of the intersection of West Overlook Road NE and Dubuque Street NE'in Penn Twp.). 14. Application S9512 of O. Jay Taylor requesting preliminary and final plat approval of Pigeon Timber, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 and the NE 1/4 of Section 26; Township 80 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 4.521 acre, residential subdivision, located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Treefarm Lane NE and Newport Road NE in Newport Twp.). 15. Application 89513 of Jack 8hubatt, signed by Tom Anthony of Landmark Surveying and Engineering, requesting preliminary and final plat approval of Shubatt Treefarm Estates, a subdivision located in the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 26; Township 80 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 2-lot, 11.888 acre, residential subdivision, located at the eastern end of Treefarm Lane NE, approximately 1/8 of a mile east of the intersection of Treefarm Lane NE and Newport Road NE in Newport Twp.). To: IO~ACITYCLERK From: Board o¢Supervisors 3-8-95 4:]2pm p. 8 or 9 Agenda 3-9-95 Page 7 16. Application 89514 of John C Schneider, signed by Dean Beranek of MMS Consultants Inc., requesting final plat approval of Forest. Ridge Subdivision Part Two, a subdivision located in the S 1/2 ol.' the ~ 1/4 of Section 34; Township 80 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa. (This is a 30 lot, 59.09 acre, residential subdivision with one non-buildable lot, located on the west side of Jasper Avenue NW, lying north of the Jasper Avenue overpass of Interstate 80 in Clear Creek Twp.). 17. Application S9515 of Sandra K. Morgan requesting preliminary and final plat approval of Scheetz - Morgan Subdivision, a subdivision located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 29; Township 80 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iow. a. (This is a 1 lot, 21.92 acre, residential subdivision with one non- buildable lot, located on the south side of Copi Road approximately 1/8 of a mile west of the intersection of Copi Road NW and Half Moon Avenue NW in Clear Creek Twp.). 7. Business from the County Attorney. a) Discussion/action re: assignment of scavenger tax certificate S-259 (south 3'4" of Lot 11 Block 3, Murphy's Addition, North Liberty) to Antone and Agnes Wagner for $107.53 delinquent taxes. b) Discussion/action re: factfinder's report regarding Johnson County administrative unit collective bargaining. c) Report re: other items. 8. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Action re: agreement between Johnson County and the City Coralville for public safety communication services. b) Other of To; IO~ CITY CLERK From; Board of' Supervisors 3-B-95 4:12pm p. g oF 9 Agenda 3-9-95 9. Adjourn to informal meeting. Page 8 Public Meeting for review and comments regarding Region X ISTEA Transportation Improvement Program for FY 96 - FY 98/discussion. b) inquiries and reports from the public. c) Reports and inquires from the members of the Board of Supervisors. d) Report from the County Attorney. e) Other 10. Adjournment. To: IO~ CITY CLERK From: Ooard of Supervisors 3-I3-95 9:~Sam p. 2 oF 3 Jmhnson Count,~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Charles D. DufBy, Chairperson Joe Bolk¢om Stephen P. La¢ina Don Sehr Sally Slutsman March 14, 1995 INFORMAL MEETING 1. Call to order 9:00 a.m. Agenda Review of the canvass of votes for North Liberty special election, the informal minutes of March 7th recessed to March 9th, and the formal minutes of March 9th. 3. Business from the Comity Engineer. a) Discussion re: b) Discussion re: Pmgram. c) Other detour agreement with Iowa City on Mater Avenue. set date for work session on Five-Year Construction Business from Scott Long, Executive Director for EMS, Inc. re: proposal to move Ambulance Department to private sector/discussion. Business from Sue Dulek, Co-Chair of Young Lawyers Division Domestic Abuse Committee re: use of Johnson County Courthouse as backdrop for introduction and ending narrative lbr Domestic Abuse Educational video sponsored by Yom~g Lawyers Association/discussion. 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356~o000 FAX: (319) 356-6086 To; 10~ CTTY CLER,K From: Board of' Supervisors 3-13-95 9:25am p, 3 of' 3 Agenda 3-14-95 Page 2 Business from Mike Sullivan, Director of Ambulance Department. a) Discussion re: bid for ambulance services from VA Hospital. b) Other Business from Laurie Robinson, Treasurer for Johnson County Sesquicentennial Commission re: Sesquicentennial Commission Legacy Project/discussion. 8. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Discussion re: job description and salary range for Zoning Administrator position and authorration to advertise for the position. b) Reports c) Other 9. Discussion from the public. 10. Recess. FORMAL MEETING TO FOLLOW ~'l'.~ --: '~ · Match6~ 1995 : .: . . A Megabank Joins the Critics of Urban Sprawl San Francisco-It had to hap- ~pT.x te(I force in financial Amer. u'a would wake up and blow the wht~n. le on.~l d~.'elopment, labtqtng Irapfmg ~rowth a~ the city-wrecking. counuy.despofl. rag. tax-gobbling and economy- butradar/, like Oregon's, or sim- ilar regulation that could oblige res pdnciple~ are unquestion- ably having an im paL~. on soypu- ente altitudes and behavior. Could Ceres-style principles tieusing. corperation flight.- from the ciflea and older set> uth~. to land on the periphery tr,'es)-.h.zs pinched sprawl. ra~ng ~p~ on ci~es. ~n · Ni~tlbn's Cities Weekly cized~penmg a criUcal ¢lebale whwh rarely oecum al all now? The very idea .sounds revolu. tinnavy. But d's no less r~'ois- tiona~ than it wntdd have Ix'an to predict, a few months ago, that the Bank of .L, nedra was ais~ut to sign nnto a manifesto of ,alarm abelR the qpmwl ~hirh [tq Oa~ loan ull~cers did so much to destroyrig force it tq. economizing way. nule of added streets and free. America's igor, on our mural bankroll. Now the Ba~k of America. l~X~'enso, the rarely chaflenged ~rays, whole n~t water and landscape. But why couldn't t:alffornla~$ ~ ~,;J/~.~.C~llfornia Building Iadu~.~_~ ~n~g~,ar~ '+-~,l~[~l;li~ O~,m:%~ .,(c~M~O~Wa~tm~:M menL has taken the phmge. The Irauric woMs come in a manifesto-" Beyond Sprawl"- wificlt the bank has recently qued joiafly with ~e ~ ('L',SO-I~'wri Greenbelt Alliance, rite {.~}w Income Ilsrating l"lmd 'flwre's no doubt. them part- nets declare. that st)raM helped filel Calilomia's "unl~mdleled ~hlp for mtllioe& But not. they warn. "un- checked sprawl ha.q shifted from ,an engine of Califomia's grnwth hth:t gr.a~h ~md degrade our quality of life." One can almoq feel the tec- }lank of America's weigjat joins and "ahandonment of people · .ays. ts Cahfomla's whole fit- nesses on the urban fringe my find sprawl mexpeluh.e, "the ul. er~. t~o the government, and. so- bank, whde jmmng in the Rj~haB~rrison. senior vice fairs and a key figure in organJz. hag the report. is simply~ get a dialogne rollMR, in explore new sided, somewhat hysterical tome singling out suburban homing ~ a pox upon Callfor nia'$ physwal and economic 11eMnd the .scenes, develop- ers and the IlIA let Bank of America chairman and CEO done anghing of the kind." the sigu.on of its California Re- naaonvdde-is whether and how the islet bushae~ community will joia the debate. It's alwa)..s for corporations. drawn up by the wake of the dew~L.~ing oil spill in Alaska. from reducing and eliminath~g dangerous emissions to pledg- prn~e~. O~ 78 or the nation's 500 General Motore, H.B. Fuller and the Sun Co., have signed on, according to the New York- based Conference Board. But with stockholder pressme, Beyond Spr l, T0w :rd Sustoinable Development "Unfetlered sprawl will make the state less compellitre, bur. den rexpayers with higher costs, degrade the environment, and lower the quality of life for eveq, Califnrnian." .co conchides a new report. "Beyond Sprawl: ~' Pa~ems of Oro~4h to Fit the New C~lifor- nia." The .study. Sl?omored by ~ of America, the California Resources A~ency, Greenbelt Alliance, and q'he Low income Ho~mtng l'hnd, offers a vmSet7 of ideas (see box) about how Catiforinans-.and people in other stole.~-can wnrk together to bulld..a~d~m a smang economy and a good quahty of life for the 2~st century. To obtain a copy of the l:~nge report, contact £n'~ron. mental Pohcies #fig00, Bank of America. PO Box 87000. San Francisco. CA ~41il7; phone, (41.5) 022.81,54. Re~ommendalt~ 1. Delineate where new development should end ~ho~d not ~ur. ~'o o~~t hahtints, o~n sp~e. ~d prime t~ ~d. E~ ~licies co~ge s~culatwe leap-frog d~elopment. D~'elop l~d al · e sub~ f~ge oMy at den- si~ I~e~ ~a will not promote f~er sprawl 2. M~e more e~clent u~ ~d ~.~ of~a~ devel. o~d l~d. U~ ~c~ Mcan. development ~Hcms to rein. force ~e ~'en~ of older ur~ ~d sub~ nei~r- ho~s, including bro~fields ~d ab~don~ ~ b~. ~thout displacing tow-income resMen~. ,~ayorJeffStoaelth~[~name. healart in the knee before the And be wan~ to keep it ~hanl- Ol~qllpic TriaLs Ln,lmmaO- 199,1. self. ~went on to win the st~'er medal. /So when Jeff Gillonly, t~e ex-~ "Here's a guy who's a known hbsband of Olympic figure fe'M.nandheshoaldn'tbeableto s~ater Tonya Harding, peti- hide~ am the public He riOned an Oregon court to able to hide behind l~tl~mayor3ecldad he wouldn't 39, mid go through unchallenged. e mayor presides over a A March 7 h, on colhmunity of 30,000 residents Gillooly's sorhe 80 miles southeast of Los County C tMlgeles. He is eyeing his polill- ca possibilities beyond petition on Gilloo{y's Temecula. a~d now is ceasider- ing legal acOon a~ · ,Jeff Stone in ~outhern forsis has a pretly it, md if (I go) ha poltics, [ don't ~ to tar- ni$.~ my ame," Stone saJc. 3, Establish n cenalatent development framework to annd the fight algnala to in. vestors. Where development is dilnwed, sh'eamline the permit- tin~?.~ I{equire that devel- fringe pay the full marginal cost of development. En¢ournge more efficient and coorchnated local la~d use p~d~cies among lorn] gnvemmenLs. Use techno- lagira] change to combat sprawl 4. Forge a eon~ltuenc],. to build ansLalnable communi- ties. Overcome the narrnwly. fo- Build new political alliances among elected government offi- munity ac'dvists, business lead- ers, homeboildem, faxmars, and toxpayets to chart a course for ha the al- tacl of figure skater Nancy Wants His_Oo_od Name-To Himse{f said the choice of name preference ... He ~ would like to femme a mea- sure of ~rsonal prime7 when he is released." It wasn't known where Oilloob, carae up wr,.h the anrne, bm perhaps it v,~ from reruns of '"Ihe Donna Reed Show," a 1958-to-196~ silual~n comedy that featunM clean-cut charac- "I have I to protect.' tar Jeff Stone played by actor Pasl Peterson. Gillouly is setting his sen- r~nee ha a bo~-carnp program ha Hauser, Ore., and he wig be re- ~witha n name. 's attorney, Sherri Hoffman,Xc~d Wednesday she had just beg3~. to ~eazch a chSJeage to ~he"n~me change. Oregon residents c~change their name by paying a'S~5 ing fee ~ having a cunr} offi- cer ~ the n~'ne change out- side the cou.honse, she said. '~hat's all there is to it," she To: IOnCITY CLERK From: Board o~ Supermsors 3-28-95 8:5Bam p, 2 0~ 3 Johnran Counh.- Charles D. Dull'y, Chairperson Joe Bolkcom Stephen P. La¢ina Don Schr Sally Slutsmm~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS March 21, 1995 INFORMAL MEETING Agenda 1. Call to order 9:00 a.m. 2. Review of the informal and formal minutes of March 14th. 3. Business from Charles Panzer re: Veterans Affairs update/discussion. 4. Business from Gen~, Lackender re: Senior Center update/discussion. 5. Business from Mike Sullivan, Director of Ambulance Department re: bid for VA Ambulance service/discussion. 6. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Discussion m: Iowa Department of Human Services Community Mental Health Center Affiliation/Waiver request. b) Discussion m: use of Johnson County Courthouse as backdrop for introduction and ending narrative for Domestic Abuse Educational video sponsored by Young Lawyers Association. c) Reports d) Other 913 $OLFI'H DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000 To: IOWA CIl¥ CLERK From: Board of Supervisors 3-28-95 8:58am p. 3 o? 3 Agenda 3-21-95 Page 2 7. Business from the County Attorney. a) Executive Session to discuss strategy regarding collective bargaining with administrative unit. b) Other 8. Discussion from the public. 9. Recess. FORMAL MEETING TO FOLLOW 1. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Action re: bid for VA Ambulance contract. 2. Adjournment. March 17, 1 995 Representative Greg Ganske 108 Longworth House Office Bldg, Washington, DC 20515 CITY 0£ I0 WA CITY Dear Representative Ganske: The delegation of local elected officials from Iowa appreciated the arrangements made Tuesday, March 14 to get together with Congress members and/or their staff, Each year our exchanges always seem to further our abilities to understand and appreciate the challenges and opportunities all elected officials have, both at the national and local levels of government, While we discussed various areas of concern this year, one most pressing was that of pending legislation dealing with telecommunications. The potential this industry has for Iowa's future is great in our area. Because of a high penetration rate for TCI, we have enjoyed benefits of the franchise fee and provisions for four public access channels and their operation. Public awareness of City Council, educational, cultural, and emergency programs or informative material is tremendous. Your careful consideration of any Teleco bills considered this session (for instance, that of Senator Pressler's telecommunications de-regulatory act of 1995) would be greatly appreciated. We, like other cities, are non-judgmental as to whether the cable or Teleco industries prevail in this arena. Your assistance is needed in detecting the rights for local governments to: 1) manage the public right-of-way, 2) be able to negotiate for access to sophisticated systems located in our streets which would benefit our citizens Isuch as PEG channels, emergency alerts, reduced rates for intergovernmental communications systems), and 3) receive compensation for commercial use of public property for private profit. These concerns stem from our reaction to draft legislative language which addresses removing state and local legal and practical barriers to competition. While it was regrettable that we could not meet with you personally, our Council wants to add its voice to those of communities in your district in seeking your assistance when this legislation is being discussed. If you have any questions about the arrangements we have now or how de-regulation would affect us, please let me know. Sincerely yours, Mayor March 17, 1995 CITY OF I0 WA CITY Senator Charles Grassley 135 Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Grassley: Iowa City Council Members appreciated seeing you Tuesday, March 14 and having the time to spend with your Chief of Staff, Mr. Cunningham. I wanted to follow-up on emphasizing our need for your help on a couple of issues. Your careful consideration of any Teleco bills considered this session (for instance, that of Senator Presslet's telecommunications de-regulatory act of 1995) would be greatly appreciated. We, like other cities, are non-judgmental as to whether the cable or Teleco industries prevail in this arena. Your assistance is needed in detecting the rights for local governments to: 1) manage the public right-of-way, 2) be able to negotiate for access to sophisticated systems located in our streets which would benefit our citizens (such as PEG channels, emergency alerts, reduced rates for intergovernmental communication~ systems), and 3) receive compensation for commercial use of public property for private profit. These concerns stem from our reaction to draft legislative language which addresses removing state and local legal and practical barriers to competition. In addition, the greater Iowa City area remains baffled about the funding status of the University of Iowa's Professor Frank Weirich's project; a flood impact-response modeling system for the Coralville Reservoir-Iowa River-Iowa City Watershed submitted in March 1994. This modeling technique, while crucial for our pre- and post-flooding mitigation planning in this geographical area has the ability to be used with any other state any other area, for instance, that of California with its potential for future flooding. There appears to be a logjam somewhere and we are waiting for notice from the Washington office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as to when we may expect this study to begin. Any assistance or information you can give us will be helpful. Again, thank you for your time and the energy that you put forth in serving all of our citizens. Sincerely yours, r Susan M. Horowitz Mayor March 17, 1995 CITY OF IOWA CITY Congressman Jim Leach 2186 Rayburn Bldg. Washington, DC 20515 Dear Congressman Leach: Iowa City Council Members appreciated the time you spent with us and other local elected officials from Iowa on Tuesday, March 14. I wanted to follow-up on emphasizing our need for your help on a couple of issues. Your careful consideration of any Teleco bills considered this session (for instance, that of Senator Pressler's telecommunications de-regulatory act of 1995) would be greatly appreciated. We, like other cities, are non-judgmental as to whether the cable or Teleco industries prevail in this arena. Your assistance is needed in detecting the rights for local governments to: 1) manage the public right-of-way, 2) be able to negotiate for access to sophisticated systems located in our streets which would benefit our citizens {such as PEG channels, emergency alerts, reduced rates for intergovernmental communications systems), and 3) receive compensation for commercial use of public property for private profit. These concerns stem from our reaction to draft legislative language which addresses removing state and local legal and practical barriers to competition. In addition, the greater Iowa City area remains baffled about the funding status of the University of Iowa's Professor Frank WeSrich's project; a flood impact-response modeling system for the Coralville Reservoir-Iowa River-Iowa City Watershed submitted in March 1994. This modeling technique, while crucial for our pre- and post-flooding mitigation planning in this geographical area has the ability to be used with any other state any other area, for instance, that of California with its potential for future flooding. There appears to be a logjam somewhere and we are waiting for notice from the Washington office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as to when we may expect this study to begin. Any assistance or information you can give us will be helpful. Again, thank you for the time you spent with us, We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely yours, Susan M. Horowitz Mayor March 17, 1995 CITY 0£ I0CITY Senator Tom Harkin 531 Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Harkin: Iowa City Council Members appreciated the time you spent with us and other local elected officials from Iowa on Tuesday, March 14. I wanted to follow-up on emphasizing our need for your help on a couple of issues. Your careful consideration of any Teleco bills considered this session (for instance, that of Senator Pressler's telecommunications de-regulatory act of 1995) would be greatly appreciated. We, like other cities, are non-judgmental as to whether the cable or Teleco industries prevail in this arena. Your assistance is needed in detecting the rights for local governments to: 1) manage the public right-of-way, 2) be able to negotiate for access to sophisticated systems located in our streets which would benefit our citizens (such as PEG channels, emergency alerts, reduced rates for intergovernmental communications systems), and 3) receive compensation for commercial use of public property for private profit. These concerns stem from our reaction to draft legislative language which addresses removing state and local legal and practical barriers to competition. In addition, the greater Iowa City area remains baffled about the funding status of the University of Iowa's Professor Frank Weirich's project; a flood impact-response modeling system for the Coralville Reservoir-Iowa River-iowa City Watershed submitted in March 1994. This modeling technique, while crucial for our pre- and post-flooding mitigation planning in this geographical area has the ability to be used with any other state any other area, for instance, that of California with its potential for future flooding. There appears to be a logjam somewhere and we are waiting for notice from the Washington office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as to when we may expect this study to begin. Any assistance or information you can give us will be helpful. Again, thank you for the time you spent with us. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely yours, Sueart M. Horowitz Mayor City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: March 2I, 1995 Memo for Record City Manager Material Sent to Council Only Memorandum from the City Manager regarding acting city manager. /~7~_ Memorandum from the Housing Rehab Program regarding elevation project. /~)~, City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: March 20, 1995 City Council City Manager Acting City Manager I will be out of the office from Thursday, March 23, through Sunday, March 26. I will return to Iowa City on Sunday at 6:00 P.M. On Thursday and Friday, Chuck Schmadeke will be Acting City Manager. His home phone is 354-4338. On Saturday and Sunday, R. J. Winkelhake will be Acting City Manager. His home phone is 338-9554. cc: Department Directors j 00 "' City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE · TO ' FROM March 20, 1995 Steve Atkins, City Manager Linda Woito, City Attorney Marianne Milkman, Community Development Coordinator Ron Boose, Senior Building inspector : Steve Schornhorst, Housing Rehab Assistant,~ Pam Barnes, Housing Rehab Officer RE : Elevation Project Now that the frost is going out of the ground it is time to begin work on the elevation and permanent foundation project at the Baculis and Thatcher Mobile Home Courts again. As you know, the project was placed on hold for the winter in early January. We met with the project manager, Shaun Webb, on Friday March 17,1995 for a planning session, We have also been in contact with the other two contractors involved, Wolf Const, and DeWitt's Mobile Home Service. All have agreed that the project should proceed as soon as possible. There is one home left at Baculis which we are responsible for, //122 owned by Randy Ranshaw. This is a replacement home which was moved in after we had completed work at that court for the winter. A proceed to work ordered was issued for this home dated 3/17/95, and we expect work to be completed within two weeks. This is the final. home at the Baculis court. When the work is complete we will contact Landmark Engineering to do the final elevation certificates and we should not have to return the Baculia court for any further flood work. There are several people who refused to allow us to assist them comply with the Flood Plain 0rdinanc~, and a complete list will be provided to Ron Boose at the end of the project. Four homes at Thatcher were completed last winter, leaving six to elevate and place on permanent foundations. One owner so far at Thatcher has refused assistance. Depending on the weather we hope to have the entire project completed by May 1,1995. City of iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: March 24, 1995 City Council City Manager Material in Information Packet Memoranda from the City Manager: a. Safe Drinking Water Act - Unfunded Mandates b. Coralville Reservoir Study c. Burlington Street Dam Safety d. Federal Budget Cuts e. Convention & Visitors Bureau Funding f. Finance Options g. Water and Wastewater Discussion/Call-in March 29 /Oy/ /~/~. Memoranda from the Water Division: a. Community Discussion - March 29 b. I.C. Water Public Information Memorandum from the City Attorney regarding Water Impact Fees regulations~/O/~o Memorandum from the Director of Parking and Transit and the Traffic Engineer regarding parking meters in the 500 block of Iowa Avenue. Memorandum from the Department of Planning and Community Development regarding Towncrest Relocation Program. Memorandum from the City Clerk regarding sidewalk cafes. Minutes of the February 7 and March 7, 1995, meetings of the Sensitive Areas Committee. IOlg Article: Car Co-ops: Sharing the Solution Agendas for the March 21 and March 23, 1995, meetings of the Johnson /~_~. County Board of Supervisors. Agenda for the 3/28 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Memo from City Mgr. regarding Barker Financial Options - Water and Wastewater Project. Memo from Senior Planner regarding Fringe Area Agreement. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Mamh 22, 1995 City Council City Manager Safe Drinking Water Act - Unfunded Mandates You will recall at the conclusion of last year's Congress the Safe Drinking Water Act, which was being proposed to have a number of major revisions, failed to secure Congressional approval. My understanding is the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is currently back on the Congressional agenda. The legislation appears to be moving through both houses and amendments are likely. Both environmental groups and the representatives of the water industry are pressing for certain changes in the legislation. We will have to wait and see. Both houses of Congress have approved their version of the Unfunded Mandates Act. It is important to note and, in particular, when it comes to any future public discussions, that neither the House nor Senate bills ban unfunded federal mandates outright. The legislation requires that cost estimates be prepared for any new law so Congress would know the cost of the regulation before a bill is passed. If a bill contains more than $50 million in unfunded mandates for state or local government, it would be subject to a procedural vote by the House and Senate. Both the House and Senate bills do not apply to current unfunded mandates and we remain obligated under those laws. While it appears thero may be some future relief, current federal legislation with respect to water and wastewater remains in place and fully enforceable by federal or state agencies. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 20, 1995 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Coralville Reservoir Study You may recall during our budget discussion I mentioned the interest by the Rock Island Corps of Engineer's office in some type of study of the Coralville Reservoir, in particular how it is operated and whether operational changes could be undertaken to lessen or eliminate some of the flood damage which occurred in 1993. At that time we were informed a feasibility study would cost approximately $1.6 million and the expectation is that state and local governments would need to provide $800,000 of the proposed budget. Since that time we have contacted the DNR and other officials involved in this study proposal in order to receive more information. The basic study is called a "section 216 initial appraisal". The initial appraisal provided certain findings, none of which, I believe, you will find.too profound. They are: There has been significant development in the Iowa River floodplain since the Coralville Reservoir project was constructed. Additional years of flow rocords have resulted in revised discharge/frequency estimates for the Iowa River and its tributary streams. The 1991 Coraiville Reservoir water control plan was based on outdated information and would not, in itself, address all of the flooding problems upstream and downstream. A more comprehensive investigation is necessary if we are to evaluate operational changes, structural improvements or accommodation thereof to reduce future flood damage. In order to proceed, the proposed study would involve the following four elements which would include: 1) gathering economic data, 2) a reconnaissance study which would involve detailed hydraulic, economic, environmental, engineering, real estate and other urban planning investigations, 3) a feasibility study would occur if the reconnaissance study results in a finding that there is a federal interest in such capital improvements, and 4) detailed design and construction would occur if the feasibility study results in a recommendation for a structural improvement project and there is state and local support for the recommended project. There is one major caveat - Congress must authorize/appropriate the necessary funds. Federal regulations require that such study efforts have state and local support. The reconnaissance study is to be conducted at 100% federal cost and the feasibility study would be conducted at a 50/50 federal/non-federal cost share basis. It is this study that has been estimated to cost $1.6 million. The $800,000 can be made up by the state as well as certain in- kind services. In the event the feasibility study would lead to actual project design and construction, the state/local sponsor would be required to contribute 25% of the construction cost. it is estimated that the reconnaissance study would begin no sooner than FY97, which is October of 1996. In order to at least keep our interests known to the Corps of Engineers and the State Department of Natural Resources, I directed a letter which indicated that we acknowledge the benefit of such a study; that, based on our interest, we might agree to be a financial participant. It appears this is a long way off but at the very least we have reserved certain rights to participate if, at some future time, it appears to be in our best interest, cc: Chuck Schmadeke Rick Fosse bNeseR'olr City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Mamh 20, 1995 City Council City Manager Burlington Street Dam Safety As an update, the consulting engineering firm of NNW Inc. is in the process of preparing cost estimates for a number of improvements to the Burlington Street Dam. These recommended safety improvements include: Upstream and downstream warning signs; Buoys across the river to be placed a few hundred feet upstream from the Burlington Street bridges - prices with and without cables between the buoys will be prepared; Grab chains below the Burlington Street bridges; Improvements to the bridge railings along sidewalks to reduce the likelihood of small children accidentally falling into the river, As soon as these cost estimates are prepared, the City Engineer will reconvene a meeting of the interested parties to discuss and attempt to secure agreement on improvements, as well as cost sharing and maintenance responsibilities. Rick has also suggested we make a formal request to the University to direct the appropriate faculty or staff to investigate possible modifications to the dam to reduce the danger created by the roller effect. The University has at its disposal some of the best resources available for such a study, and we are going to encourage them to do so. I will be directing a letter to the University. CC; bcS-ICM Rick Fosse Chuck Schmadeke Charlie Denney RNAC Ioo City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 21, 1995 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Federal Budget Cuts On a vote of 227-200, the House on March 16 approved legislation (H.R. 1158) rescinding over 917 billion in domestic programs. The House did not restore funding for key urban programs such as summer youth, CDBG, or any of the many housing programs identified for cuts. $5.4 billion of the rescissions package would be used to pay for disaster assistance in California and 40 other states. The Republican Leadership had intended to use the remaining portion of the $17 billion package to offset a proposed 9188.8 billion tax cut, but instead approved an amendment intended to reserve these funds for deficit reduction. The next step for the rescissions package will be the Senate where the full Appropriations Committee is expected to begin review as early as this Friday, March 24, and the bill may be on the Senate floor the following week. At the present time, the Appropriations subcommittees are not scheduled to formally meet prior to full committee action. it is not yet known if the Senate will seek to match the $17 billion rescinded in the House. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: Mamh 21, 1995 City Council City Manager Convention & Visitors Bureau Funding During the budget review the CVB Board of Directors indicated their interest in having the City Council responsible for the $10,000 in contributions from the hotel/motel tax to the Iowa Festival and Jazz Festival. You may recall your original position was to have the CVB assume responsibility and a full 25% share of the hotel/motel tax would be distributed to the CVB. Their response was the City should reduce the distribution by $10,000 and assume responsibility for payment to the festivals. I have assumed that such a position is acceptable to you and therefore will instruct the Department of Finance to reduce their distribution of monies from the hotel/motel tax to the OVB by the $10,000. The actual financial arrangements have not been completed and we will consult the OVB to minimize the financial impact on their operations as well as fulfill our obligations to the Iowa Arts Festival and the Jazz Festival. cc; Don Yueuis Wendy Ford City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 22, 1995 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Finance Options Attached is a summary of the water/wastewater finance options which were presented to you the other evening. These options indicate the estimated annual rate adjustment necessary as well as the effect of the rate adjustment on the average residential customer (800 cu. fl./monthly) for water and/or sewer as indicated. We also show the monthly costs of the finance option on a large industrial and commercial user, Also attached is a list of the policy issues pedinent to this finance summary. If you direct me to proceed with negotiations concerning revised construction schedules, lhe outcome of such negotiations is directly relevant to the finance option selected. The wastewater project is moving along in compliance with the current DNR schedule. As you may recall, our initial compliance schedule of the year 2000 was unacceptable to the Federal EPA and we have now negotiated a revised - our current - schedule with the State DNR, which is responsible to the EPA for state-wide wastewater compliance. The water treatment project does have far more latitude with respect to construction schedule. Our primary concern is the ability of our current treatment plant to meet new water quality regulations, as well as the age and condition of our current plant are such that significant capital investment in an outdated plant is difficult to justify. After the review of these finance options and any other options that we gather from the meeting of March 29, you will need to authorize financing and whether you feel any DNR/EPA negotiations concerning the proposed projects, most notably wastewater, would be wodhwhile. Also attached is a revised finance plan from the Barkers. We do not endorse this proposal and offer it to you as information. Many of their assumptions are different from and contrary to lhose we used in preparation of our financial options, notably they assume a schedule of compliance that may not be acceptable to regulatory agencies, and populalion growth. We have avoided population growth factors in that they are difficult to substantiate over the long run and therefore increase the risk/costs of borrowing. There is no limit to the number of options that can be calculated, as well as the assumptions applied. We must settle on a compliance/negotiation strategy in order to make any finance assumption realistic. Attachments CITY OF IOWA CITY - WASTEWATER WATER RATE OPTIONS WATER PROJECT - $50,000.000 (98 DOLLARS SAMPLE OPTIONS OPTION I OPTION II OPTION 16 OPTION IV WASTEWATER - ACCUMULATE WASTEWATER - FINANCE CASH OVER TiME-S60.000.000, $40.500.000 [BONOS}. FY 1996 15% 22.93 40% 27.92 FY 1997 15% 26.37 10% 30.7I ~Y 1998 15% 30.33 0% 30.71 FY 1999 15% 34.88 0% 30.71 FY 2000 10% 38.37 5% 32,25 FY 2001 10% 42.21 0% 32.25 FY 2002 5% 44.32 0% 32.25 FY 2003 5% 46.54 5% 33.86 FY 2004 5% 48.97 0% 38.86 FY 2005 0% 48.87 0% 33.86 FY 2006 -50% 24.44 ( 5% 35.56 In 101h year (20051 the project i cost wourd be $60,000,000. Sample Options-Large User Commercial for Sewer FY 19951 35% 5,828 FY 2000 10% 11.211 FY 2005 0% 14,276 FY 2006 -50% 7.138 ~lndustfial ~ FY 19951 35% 26.000 EY 2000 10% 50.021 FY 2005 0% 63,696 FY 2006 -50% 31,848 WASTEWATER · ACCUMULATE CASH OVER 1/'3 OF CONSTRUCTION IN FY1997. 1998 AND 1999. Estimated Ave. 35% 19.94 170% 53.84 0% 59,22 -25% 44,42 -50% 22.21 16% 25,54 0% 25.54 0% 25.54 0% 25,54 0% 25.54 Assumed Bond teem ot 25 years 'Pay 1/3or $13,500,000~n FY 97. 98 and 99, $40.500.000 ~ 7% ~ 25 years for Sewer Sower 35% 5,828 35% 5,828 5% 9,429 -50% 6,490 0% 9,894 0% 7,464 5% 10.389 0% 7,464 35% 26,000 35% 26.000 5% 42,042 -50% 28,958 0% 44,144 0% 33.301 5% 46,351 0% 33.301 OPTION V OPTION Vl WATER - ACCUMULATE CASH WATER - FINANCE $60.833,000 OVER TIME- $74,000,000. CONSTRUCT 1N FY2005 Estimated Ave. Mo. Annual Rate Residential Cost Adjust for Water 40% 14.05 20% 15.86 7 20% 20.23 20% 24,28 ~ 20% 29,14 ~ 20% 34.97 20% 41.96 2O% 50.35 20% 60.42 20% 72.50 20% 87,00 -50% 43.5O i ln 101h year [2005) the prolec! Icest would be $74,000,000. Will DNR permit a delay in (BONDS),CONSTRUCTIN FY 2000 WATER - ACCUMULATE CASH OVER TIME-S30.417,000, FINANCE $30,417,000 (BONDS), CONSTRUCT IN FY 2000 40% 14.05 40% 14,05 10% 15,45 50% 21.06 10% 17.01 40% 29,51 10% 29.89 10% 20.99 10% 32.8B 20% 25.19 0% 32.88 0% 25.19 10% 36.17 0% 25,19 0% 36.17 0% 25.19 40% 3,150 20% 7,838 20% 19.504 · 50% 9,752 40% 16.800. 20% 41,803 20% 104,020 .50% 52,010 40% 3,150 10% 5,073 40% 3.150 10% 14,262 10% 8.104 0% 5,648 0% 8,104 0% 5,648 40% 16,600 40% 16,800 10% 27.057 10% 76.064 10% 43,216 0% 30.121 0% 43,216 0% 30.121 March 22, 1995 Policy Considerations Need realistic construction (compliance) timetables in order to develop finance options. Need the approval of other government agencies to proceed with project implementation. What is the obligation of future generations to share in the financing costs? If we are successful in negotiating a revised compliance schedule, we thereby assume an Increase in public health risk (compliance ~ regulations) for water treatment and increased environmental consequences (ammonia in rivers) for the wastewater project. Economic variables in market affect cost of construction; cost of borrowing; inflation; application of local preferences; use of federal money. Do we treat projects separately with respect to timetable for construction, compliance, and financing? BARKER A P A R T M E N T S Dear Council Member: My father is out of the country, so I have taken over the job of confusing you with more spreadsheets and rate schedules. Don Yucuis has provided us with much more information than we had available before, and has been very helpful in explaining some of the details of how the water and wastewater projects can and should be financed. Although our financing plan remains basically the same, we have made some adjustments in the rate schedules and financing details in order to provide you with an alternative plan that is workable. Attachment A shows the revised rate schedules. If you have the time and patience, the remaining attachments provide more detail. Attachments C-F are spreadsheets which are based on spreadsheets given to me by Don. Attachment B shows the am~rnl)tions behind the spreadsheets. I would like to emphasize that this financing plan provides for construction costs of $91,000,000. If you can ftad ways to reduce the costs, the rates can be adjusted accordingly. If you have any questions please call me at 354.2410 or 354-7605. Sincerely, J'ma Barker Seville Scotsdale Park Place Parkside Manor Westgate Villa Emerald Court 6 Lime Kiln Lane, N.E. * Iowa Citv, IA 52240 ' (319) 354-2t110 Attachment A Water % Increase Cost 1994 $11.35 1995 19.00% $13.51 Barker Proposal l - Revised 1996 1997 1998 15.00% 13.00o/o 14.00% $15.53 $17.55 $20.01 1999 14.00% $22.81 2000 14.00% $26.00 2001 13.00% $29.38 2002 q.00% $29.09 Wastewater % Increase Cost 1994 $14.77 1995 15.50% $17.06 1996 15.50% $19.70 1997 15.50% $22.76 1998 15.00% $26.17 1999 -5.O0% $24.86 2000 1.00% $25.11 2001 1.00% $25.36 2002 2.00% $25.87 io°mbined Increase ost 1994 $26.12 1995 17.02% $30.57 1996 15.28% $35.24 1997 14.40% $40.31 1998 14.56% $46.18 1999 3.23% $47.67 2000 7.22% $51.11 2001 7.10% $54.75 2O02 0.39% $54.96 Water % Increase Cost 1994 $11.35 1995 40.00% $15.89 Barker Proposal 2 - Revised 1996 1997 1998 9.60% 9.60% 9.60% $17.42 $19.09 $20.92 1999 9.60% $22.93 2000 9.60% $25.13 2001 9.60% $27.54 2002 4.00% $28.64 Wastewater % Increase Cost Combined % Increase Cost 1994 $14.77 1994 $26.12 1995 1996 35.00% 6.50% $19.94 $21.24 1995 I 1996 37.17% 7.87% $35.83 $38.65 1997 6.50% $22.62 1997 7.90% $41.70 1998 6.50% $24.09 1998 7.92% $45.01 1999 4.00% $25.05 1999 6.60% $47.98 2OOO 0.00% $25.05 2000 4.59% $50.18 2001 0.00% $25.05 2001 4.81% $52.59 2002 2.00% $25.55 20O2 3.05% $54.19 Attackraent B Assumptions Construction Begins Cost of Project: Portion Already Financed: To Be Spent In Year 2000 Inflation At 3%: After Inflation: Cash Accumulated By 2000: Bonds Issued In Year 2000: Interest Rate: Amortization Length: Population Growth: Proposal I Proposal 2 Water Water 2000 2000 $50,000,000 $50,000,000 $ 6,894,385 .$ 6,894,385 $43,105,615 $43,105,615 $ 6,865,607 $ 6,865,607 $49,971,222 $49,971,222 $ 6,500,000 $ 9,000,000 $43,471,222 $40,971,222 6.5% 6.5% 25 Years 25 Years 1/2% per year 1/2% per year Construction Begins: Cost of Project: Portion Akeady Financed: To Be Spent In 1997: Inflation At 3%: After Inflation: Cash Accumulated By 1997: Bonds Issued In 1997: Interest Rate: Amortization Length: Population Growth: Proposal I Proposal 2 WasteWater WasteWater 1997 1997 $41,000,000 $41,000,000 $ 4,366,050 $ 4,366,050 $36,633,950 $36,633,950 $ 2,231,008 $ 2,231,008 $38,864,958 $38,864,958 $ 2,000,000 $ 4,000,000 $36,864,958 $34,864,958 6.5% 6.5% 25 Years 25 Years 1/2% per year 1/2% per year I have assumed that population growth will have a proportional effect on revenues and operating expenses. Actual population growth in Iowa City has been approximately 1.2% per year since 1990. Other than the population growth adjustment, the expenses came from Don Yucuis' projections. The fiscal year is July 1st through June 30th. Since the new rates begin on March 1st each year, they only apply to 1/3 of the fiscal year. The formula I used increases 2/3 of 1994 revenue by the cumulative increase for the previous year, and increases 1/3 of 1994 revenue by the ctanulative increase for the current year. I have kept the debt coverage ratio at or above the required 110% and have kept the balances in the operating accounts at comfortable levels. Please let me know ifyoit would like a copy of the spreadsheets on a diskette. WATER FUND-BARKER PROPOSAL #1-CONSTRUCT IN CY 2000 TOTAL $50,000,000 PLUS INFLATION FOR 5 YEARS AT 3% ON 54-3,105,615 CASH OF $6,500,000, BORROW $1,500,000 IN 1994, $5,394,385 ~N 1995, AND $43,471,2.22 IN 2000 Attachment C t t e-fLecave 3- INCREASE EFFECTNE JN MARCH OF EACH YEaR · . '-~.."~ _ ." ...:.., ~ ~* -"~.~E'~z "~ ~z[ -~, %- "~'~ ........ ~ ....... ,~[ · .~:~ .... . '. _'-..:'2 :': f~:~i '-:~.~I:: ~ -"~ '~[::~ ~T~.:':-'i~ ............. "- - ........... ,4~ -- ========================= .......r "' ~ ......f ..................T ................~ ...................i ......~- ......~ ............... ~ NetAvaita~eforEe~'~ ....... [ ....... [ ......... L 1,144.~ ~1,~1 1,324.483 ~ 1,767,s32 2343~7 i 3059,925 3.g33,8~ J 4,~4.320 I 5, 05,0~ / 4.~91,1~ I 4,755,z00 j 4,476,595 ~/ oe~ coverage ra~R~en~ Debt O~y ~ ~ ................ -[ .................. ~ .... ~ ....... ] ......... ~ ....... ~ ~o :Z:Z. FZZ_ _:' ' '.~ , ....[ ' - ) '~ .........' ' ...........~ '--~ .......~ "' "' I' -" .....m- -'"=--~" -'-' ' ' i '-'--~-' ~ '-' WATER FUND-BARKER PROPOSAL #2-CONSTRUCT IN CY 2000 TOTAL $50,000,000 PLUS INFLATION FOR 5 YEARS AT 3% ON $43,105,615 CASH OF $9,000,000, BORROW $1,500,000 IN 1994., $5,394,385 IN 1995, AND $40,971,2221N2000 Attachment D 3 11 15 -1'7' 710,657 741.270 763.531 _. 780,437 810.030 .................... ~.~ -" -'-~.796 51.765 ~.321 ~,73~ 11~.1~ - 145.~0 Pd~ Year ~cum~ances 0 ~ ' ~5 [ ~ -~7~ .......... ~ ---- ~" 0 ~ .... ~ .... ~ ~ ....... ~ ....... 4.751 SEWER FUND-BARKER PROPOSAL #1-CONSTRUCT IN CY 1997 TOTAl. $4-1,000,000 PLUS INFLATION FOR 2. YEARS AT 3% ON $36,633,950 CASH OF $2,000,000, BORROW $2,366,050 IN 1994, S2,000.000 iN 1995. AND S36,864,958 IN 1997 Attachment E SEWER FUND-BARKER PROPOSAL #2.-CONSTRUCT IN CY 1997 TOTAL $41,000,000 PLUS INFLATION FOR 2 YEARS AT 3% ON $36,633,950 CASH OF S4,000,000, BORROW $2.,366,050 IN 1994, $2,000,000 IN 1995. AND $34,SS,,q-,B58 IN 1997 Attachment F M I . o ;2O 500 20 City of iowa City IVIEIVIORANDU M Date: March 22, 1995 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Water and Wastewater Discussion/Call-in -- March 29 We have concluded the plans for the water/wastewater call-in program scheduled for Wednesday, March 29 at 6:30 p.m. in Room A at the public library. The following is a summary of the major points as to how we will proceed. We have reviewed these points with Mayor Horowitz. At the head table will be representatives of the two consulting engineering firms and the City staff, This will include Ed Moreno, Dave Elias, Chuck Schmadeke, representatives from Stanley Consultants and HR Green and the City Manager, This will be a live call-in. Following introductions by the Mayor, a telephone number will flash across the screen for people to call in with questions. The questions will be received and written down. They will not go live over the air. Questions will be presented to the panelists. The audience will also be provided with cards/pencils to write down questions to be directed to the panel. The major rewew issues identified in the February 10 summary memorandum will be presented by representatives of the panel. These will include such things as breakpoint chlorination, aquifer storage and recovery, the use of other sites, etc. It is intended a brief presentation will occur early in the meeting on each major issue. The meeting is planned for two hours and following the conclusion the panel and other staff representatives will remain available for more informal discussion with the audience. All the various charts, graphs, maps etc. are planned to be available. We plan to distribute flyers and make other. media contacts. The Press-Citizen will run an advertisement on Saturday, -2- We would hope that the panel would answer the technical questions, Political discus- sions/decisions should be reserved for your formal Council meeting. CO; vc',caiHn Chuck Schmadeke Ed Moreno Dave Elias Carol Sweeting Don Yucuis Iowa City Water Division Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: RE: CC: March 23, 1995 Steve Atkins Carol Sweeting Community Discussion Chuck Schmadeke, Bob Hardy, Dave Elias, Ed Moreno The enclosed ad will run in the Press Cit'~n, Daily Iowan and Advertiser. Press Citizen Saturday 3-25-95 Daily lowan Tuesday 3-28-95 Advertiser Wednesday 3-29-95 Posters will run in 22 buses Friday 3-24-95 thru 3-30-95 Press Release was sent on Thursday to 8 media sources. Posters will also be tacked up a~ound d~e community. Flyers were sent to internal mailboxes to be posted in all Ciby Departments and Divisions. Iowa City Water Division 410 E Washington Iowa City, IA 52240 Community Discussion Iowa City Water and Waste Water Projects For Immediate Release Wednesday, March 22, 1995 Contact: Carol Sweetlng IC Water Information/Education Coordinator (319)356-5164 Community program to discuss the Iowa City Water and Wastewater projects will be held March 29, 1995 6:30 -8:30 p.m. Iowa City Public Library, meeting room A. This event will a[so be televised live on the Iowa City Government Access Channel. Questions will be taken from the audience and also the public can call in at (319)356-5209 from 6:60 -8:30 p,m. City Staff, Howard IL Green and Stanley Consultants will be waiting to answer questions. Community Discussion: Iowa City Water & Wastewater Projects March 29~ 1995 -- 6:30-8:30 p.m. Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room A Government Access Channe~ Questions 6:30-8:30 (319) 356-5209 Plan now to attend or watch and phone-in with your questions about the upcoming water and wastewater projects. City Staff, Howard Ro Green and Stanley Consultants will be waiting for your questions. IOWACITYWATERDIV TEL No.519~565167 Mar 16,95 15:58 No.008 P.02 f , Silurian Aquifer ~ y /owa City Pump Testing ~"~/ ' PUBLIC INFORMATION/EDUCATION Thumda¥, March 16~ FOR YOUE INFOE~ON FROM: Chucl~ $chmadeke, Publl; Worfm Director (3t Oarel S~ettn~ IC Weter Public (3~9}358~1~ aqui~ ai ~ ~ Iowa Ci~ wa~ ~t p~t s~. A mc~g ~ be held for ~divldua~ ~d ~roups who udll~a ~e SlluH~ ~utf~ In the area ~o~dtn~ ~e ~p ~ s]~. The m~g wffi be held at Pe~n gitmenlO's Med~ Ccn~r~ ~0 N. Dubuque Sl~el, ~orih LIb~Ay~ on April 4 at ~:00 PM. For ~er Jnfo~adon pl~ ~1133~3141 or 35~31~. map City of iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 23, 1995 To: From: Re: The Honorable Mayor Susan M. Horowitz and Members of the City Council Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney t Fees" R~ Questions Concerning Possible "Water Impac Issue The question has been asked whether the City can impose a "water impact fee" on property owners who become future water users after the current water fee rate structure is put into place, based on a percentage of "additional or excess water use capacity" presumably calculated by the size of the new land development. Background During the hotly contested debate over water and wastewater utility fees and rate structures last October-December 1994, several methods were offered as a way of alleviating the harsh effects of a large increase in the water and wastewater fee structures, ranging as high as a 75% increase. Some of the suggested methods were: stretching the fee-increases over a longer period of time, e.g. ten years; a sales tax; "civil disobedience" by ignoring state and federal regulations; negotiating a longer construction schedule with the federal and state governments; downsizing the Iowa City Water Supply and Treatment Facility ("Water Facility"), including land site; and a "water impact fee" to be imposed against future developers and water users. I see from a memo to the City Council from City Manager Steve Atkins that, for discussion purposes, the amount of $10 million was suggested as an amount of "excess capital cost" to be recovered by the City via a water impact fee, see attached. Based on a rough estimate of 10,000 acres of land in the city's "growth area" defined by the City Council, and based on approximately 2,800 acres within the City limits, Steve then went on, also for discussion purposes, to divide the growth area by the "excess capital costs" for the Water Facility. The resulting figure of 91,000 was arrived at as follows: 10,000 acres = $1,O00 per acre 910 million The denominator represents the excess capital cost and capital investment of the Water Facility. The numerator represents the acres of growth area both inside and outside current City 'limits. Using a rough estimate of "rate of land consumption," namely 3.2 houses per acre, the resulting figure of 9313 per house for a new developer was suggested as the "water impact fee." 2 The law governing "impact fees" is governed by federal constitutional law, which limits the City's ability to impose an "impact fee," and only where evidence of all of the elements can be demonstrated: The development creates the need for the public amenity, which in this case would be the "excess water capacity" of the Water Facility. The funds collected must be specifically earmarked for and expended on the public amenity, namely for the "excess water capacity" of the Water Facility. There must be some way that the City can make an "individualized determination" that the required dedication is related to the need created by the new development. E·g·, Dolan v. City of Tiqard, 114 S. Ct. 2319 (1994). Because the various states have used differing tests for what a city must prove before extracting an impact fee, the United States Supreme Court in Dolan took this opportunity to refine the test under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution: "We think the 'reasonable relationship' test adopted by a majority of the state courts is closer to the federal constitutional norm than either of those previously discussed ('uniquely attributable' and 'some relationship'). But we do not adopt it as such, partly because the term 'reasonable relationship' seems confusingly similar to the term 'rational basis' which describes the minimal levels of scrutiny under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment· We think a term such as 'rough proportionality' best encapsulates what we hold to be the requirement of the Fifth Amendment. No precise mathematical calculation is required, but the city must make some sort of individualized determination that the required dedication [proposed water impact fee] is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development [use of excess water capacity]." Dolan v. City of Tiqard, at 2319~20 (emphasis added). In applying this "constitutional test" for the proposed fee, the impact of the development on the water facility's "excess water capacity" would presumably be the "additional need" created by the new development. Also, the $1,000/acre fee must be shown, via some "rough proportionality," to be a reasonably direct way of alleviating the added burden which the development will place on the Water Facility's "excess water capacity." Analysis: Assumptions As we proceed to apply the law to the suggested method and calculations set forth in Steve's memo, we must remember that our city water system isa unified system, which spans the entire city - as opposed to sanitary sewers that can be separated by watershed and drainage area. Also, we must keep in mind that the following facts must be assumed to be true: The Water Facility is designed to provide water for approximately 20 years, beginning with completion of the Water Facility. [This is indeed true, as verified by our engineers.] 10. 11. "Year 1" represents the day the Water Facility opens, and "Year 20" will represent the date when our "excess water capacity" is used up. The engineers can give us, with some reasonable degree of certainty, the cost of the "excess water capacity," meaning the cost of the Water Facility's ability to provide water through "Year 20." After Year 20, no "excess water capacity" will exist unless additional improvements are added. [This is a rough estimate, based on existing water quality regulations, projected water use and population growth.] The engineers can also give us, with some degree of certainty, assurances that the cost figure for our capital investment in the Water Facility between Year I and Year 20 represents "excess water capacity." Iowa City has control over all of the land set forth in the numerator of the fraction calculation, namely the "land available for growth development" from Year 1 through Year 20 and beyond. [This is not accurate as of today, although the City can certainly annex additional land.] Once the calculation or fraction is determined, the denominator will not change, i.e. the cost of the "excess water capacity." [Assuming a static or gradual growth/water usage rate seems tenuous.] Neither the numerator (developable land), nor the denominator (cost for excess water capacity) will change from Year 1 to Year 20. There is a connection which has some "rough proportionality" between the size of land consumption, e.g. acreage or dwelling units, and the water usage or "excess water capacity." [This is not the case, see my examples below.] The current water rate structure does not include the cost of collecting "excess water capacity" revenues from Year 1 through Year 20. [This is not the case with our current water rates.] Conversely, "excess water capacity" is not being paid for by current water users, and will not be paid for by future water users (except via the "water impact fee"). Otherwise, the impact fee payer will be paying twice. The current regulations concerning water quality will remain the same as they are in Year 1, so all "water quality control" standards now figured into the design and cost will remain a constant through and beyond Year 20. [This is not true.] 12. The new Water Facility is being built only to handle tomorrow's growth, not yesterday's or today's. [According to our Consultants, this is not the case.] 13. If any of the listed assumptions or events are not true, or if they change, "rough proportionality" becomes pure speculation.. It is obvious that many of the above assumptions are not true. It is therefore my recommen- dation that the Council look more closely at the other alternatives as a way of alleviating the "sting" of the increased water fees, Analysis: Practical Examples Now we are ready to apply the proposed calculation method to the Water Facility in a more practical vein: Assuming, for purposes of discussion, that Developer A moves to town in Year 1, purchases five (5) acres, prepares to construct "widgits" and store them in a warehouse, and will use 10,000 gallons of water per day. Using the proposed calculation method, Developer A would pay 95,000 as a "water impact fee," even though the "excess water capacity" of the Water Facility is already figured into Developer A's current and future water fees. In Year 2, Developer B comes to town, purchases the same size of land, namely five (5') acres, and installs a "wet brewing" facil~y which uses ten times the amount of water per day as Developer A, namely 100,000 gallons of water per day. Using the same calculation method for "excess water capacity," the City would extract the same impact fee from Developer B: 91,000 x 5 acres = 95,000. From these two examples, it is clear there is no correlation between the "real impact" on the Water Facility and the size of the land development. That is, Developer B is using at least ten times the "excess water capacity," but yet is paying the same "water impact fee." Clearly, there is no "rough proportionality" between "land consumption" and "water capacity or water usage," as set forth in the proposed calculating methods. In addition, the water users who are now paying for the new Water Facility, via their current water fees, are also purchasing a portion of the "excess water capacity" for their own future use. Old buildings are torn down every day, and new ones built - perhaps to include a larger water user. Under traditional rate structure analysis, those current users have a right to enjoy the benefit of their bargain - namely their investment in their future Water Facility. Moreover, once Developer A, who has paid for "five acres" worth of "excess water capacity," there is no assurance whatsoever that the City will indeed have that "water capacity" available in Years 2 through 20. This is simply because, as a practical matter, one or two developments may use up all of the "excess water capacity" in Year 1 or 2, quite apart from what Developers A and B have paid for or developed. In this somewhat strained analysis our problem is this: water capacity does not share the same characteristics as the "traditional tools of land use planning" used in the ordinary "impact fee" analysis, because water capacity is, on the one hand, finite and quantifiable; but on the other hand, "excess water capacity" is variable because dependent on type of water uses of the land developed; rate of the use; cost of production; new technology; and most importantly, state and federal regulatory controls. Thus, "mixing and matching" "engineering and utility rate-setting concepts" with "land use concepts" does not readily lend itself to a viable impact fee analysis. While there may be "some relationship" between land consump- tion and water consumption, there is no evidence of a "calculable connection" between "rate of consumption of land" and "rate of consumption of excess water capacity" sufficient to meet the "rough proportionality" test found in Dolan, at 2319-20; 2322. I recognize that the goal of a "water impact fee" attempts to achieve equity, and to force the "Johnny come lately" and future developer/water user to pay a "premium" for hooking onto an already-built facility. Yet the current water user is "buying into" that same future Water Facility and future water capacity. I certainly agree that whatever revenues the City needs for capital cost outlays for land, building the well fields and treatment facilities, and maintaining the Water Facility, including selling bonds, should.be built into the rate structure in as fair and equitable a way as possible. But even assuming the Council chose to "recalculate" these water fee rates by placing all revenues for "excess water capacity" onto new users (starting in Year 1), the proposed calculation still fails the "rough proportionality" test required by Dolan.. For example, in discussing the forced dedication of a bike/pedestrian trail, the U.S. Supreme Court was not at all persuaded by the city's attempted explanation: "With respect to the pedestrian/bicycle pathway, we have no doubt that the city was correct in finding that the larger retail sales facility proposed by petitioner will increase traffic on the streets of the Central Business Dis- trict ..... But on the record before us, the city has not met its burden of demonstrating that the additional number of vehicle and bicycle trips generated by the petitioner's development reasonably relate to the city's requirement for a dedication of the pedestrian/bicycle pathway easement. The city simply found that the creation of the pathway 'could offset some of the traffic demand...and lessen the increase in traffic congestion.' As Justice Peterson of the Supreme Court of Oregon explained in his dissenting opinion, however, '[t]he findings of fact that the bicycle pathway system "could offset some of the traffic demand" is a far cry from a finding that the bicycle pathway system will or is likely to, offset some of the traffic demand.' [Cite omitted.] No precise mathematical calculation is required, but the city must make some effort to quantify its findings in support of the dedication for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway beyond the conclusory statement that it could offset some of the traffic demand generated." Dolan v. City of Tiqard, at 2321-22 (emphasis added). While the suggested method of calculation has the beauty of simplicity, it will not, in my opinion, stand up to the harsh scrutiny of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and will not pass constitutional muster under Dolan. 6 Conclusion In conclusion, while the traditional concepts of land use planning might work very well with "parking impact fees" and "neighborhood open space or park impact fees," the concept of "water capacity" does not share the same land use characteristics. "Water capacity" is finite and quantifiable, but it is not linked to size of land or rate of land consumption. Rather "water capacity" is linked to types of water users, technology, rates of water use, cost of production, and most importantly, state and federal regulatory controls. You may ask then, why I have placed my imprimatur on "site-specific sanitary sewer tap-on fees." As seen in a separate memo coming to you under separate cover, the engineering, the mathematical calculations and the legal analysis are very distinct from water usage. That is in contrast to sanitary sewer, water flows in either direction in a pipe, and is not related geographically to any part of the city. Also staff has established a "water district grid system," and is assessing a cost for connection to that grid system based on a reasonably calculable determination of water distribution needs. However, the connection fee is just that - not an attempt to pay for a City-wide water service. Lastly, you should be aware that at common law, cities are prohibited from selling future city services to a private user, since the city utility must be available to all residents on a relatively equal footing. For this reason, even if we could, as a practical matter, assign a certain amount of "excess capacity" to Developer A when they pay their "impact fees," general principles of municipal law proscribe such "selling" of future services. Finally, you might ask yourself this question: Are you willing to tell our current water users that they are only paying for current water use, and that the City will only rely on future "impact fees" to pay for their future water use? This seems like a frightening prospect, and I would encourage you to elect another method of easing water rates. I know this is a complicated area, and I will be more than happy to discuss this with you informally and/or at a work session. Please give me a call regarding comments or questions. Attachments cc: City Clerk City Manager Asst. City Manager Public Works Director Finance Director Planning Director Attachments City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: December 2, 1994 City Council City Manager Water and Waslewater Tap-on Fee During your discussion the other evening, the issue of a proposed tap-on fee for water and wastewater improvements was discussed. There are several issues that need to be addressed if we are to proceed with the tap-on fee, but the following I believe will represent in general terms how it might work. -- 10,000 acres within the City limits and the City growth area · of the 10,000 acres -- 2,800 is within the city limits -- if you choose to recover $10,000,000 in capital costs (current value) for water and/or wastewater improvements 10,000 acres + $10,000,000 = $1,000 per acre Assume 3.2 houses per acre (single family zoning) = $313 per house The issues include: 1. How much money do you wish to recover from your capital investments? 2. How do we collect the monies? At subdivision; at building permit? 3. What effect might these fees have on your development policies? If the Council chooses to accept this concept, please direct the drafting of such an ordinance. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 21, 1995 To: From: Stephen Atkins, City Manager Joe Fowler, Director Parking & Transit Jim Brachtel, Traffic Engineer..<~-~- Reference: Parking Meters - 500 Block Iowa Avenue The City has received a request from Joe Michaud, proprietor of the Bookery, 523 Iowa Avenue, to install parking meters in front of his business. As a result of Mr. Michaud's request, Parking Division staff monitored the use of the existing meters, 3 thirty minute meters on the south and 4 two hour meters on the north, from January 26 until February 6. The meters were checked three times daily, 9:00 am, noon, and 3:00 pm. At all times there was parking available in the metered spaces, Mr. Michaud has been advised of these results, He states that he agrees that the current metered space is available but that it does not benefit him because it is not in front of his business. He states he needs the area directly in front of his business metered for customers and deliveries. I have advised Mr. Michaud that staff has recommended metering this area several times in the past. Each time Council has determined they did not want to install parking meters in a residential area, He has requested that they again consider installation of a limited number of meters in front of his business We will take no further action on this matter until we are directed to do so by Council. o1'1 January 19, 1995 City ',,anager Civic Center Iowa City, ~A 522q0 Uo whom it may concern; ky wife and ! run a small business, khe Bookery, a used oookstore at 523 Iowa Avenue, i..any customers complain that parking is very diffigult on our block, be have lost a lo~ of business since we moved to this locavion. ~. note that there are parking meyers on the ~est end of our block, our side of the street. ,2he meters end at the house next door, Between 7:0~ and 8:0~ A~,,, people who work downtown park for the day in front of our shop, uhey leave after 5:~oP.,. .e close at 5:30 .','., ! would li~e to request that the city install parking meters from where they leave off to the Eastern edge of my property, for our mutual benefit. An increase in ousiness for me would make my property taxes less of a burden, Sincerely,, ~ ~Joe :':~chaud, Proprietor .he Bookery TO: City Manager and City Council FROM: Steven Nasby, Associate Planner~.M~h/ RE: Tomerest Relocation Program Update CITY OF I0 WA CITY DATE: March28, 1995 As per your request, the following is a monthly update of the Towncrest Relocation Program. The following is a brief overview of our progress to date. There have been 55 households identified as eligible for relocation assistance. Of these, 38 households have moved out of Towncrest, six units are abandoned and 11 households remain to be relocated. The remaining 11 households are either working with LIllE Skills or looking for housing on their own. Three of these have another housing unit located and will be moving within the next 15-30 days. Atter these three relocate theretwill only be eight households, however, five of them have been identified as having some type of special need. On March 9, 1995 we mailed out a letter to the remaining households at Towncrest. This letter included an application form for Assisted Housing. We wanted, again, to make this type of assistance available as an option to the households that are having difficultly locating housing. Additionally, we have extended an invitation to all of the remaining residents to seek the help of LIFE Skills. 410 EAST WASIIINOTON STREET * IOWA CITY. IOWA $2240-1826 · (119) 3~6-~000 · FAX (319) ~16-$009 I01 ' City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 21, 1995 Sidewalk care Committee Members John Murphy, Bremers., Downtown Association Jean Gilpin, Preferred Stock, Cha~Lber of Commerce Jim Clayton, Soap Opera Mark Ginsberg, M.C. Ginsberg Linda Woito, City Attorney Jim Pumfrey, Fire Chief Ron Boose, Sro Building Inspector, HIS Lorraine Saeger, Adm. Asst., City Manager Mike Moran, Acting Director, Parks & Rec. David Schoon, Economic Der. Planner, PCD Pat Harney, captain, Police Dept. Rick Fosse, City Engr., Public Works Sondrae Fort, Licensing Spec., city Clerk Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Sidewalk Cafes A meeting has been set for 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 29, in the' Lobby Conference Room at the Civic Center, 410 East Washington Street. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the proposed ordinance currently before Council, review information received from other cities, and make recommendations to Council prior to their April 11 public hearing. Council may act upon the proposed ordinance at that time also. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed ordinance currently before Council as well as copies of information on sidewalk cafes from cities across the country, and a letter from Jim Clayton outlining concerns expressed to Council at their March 7 public hearing. A transcript from the March 7 public hearing is also included. (I thought this might be helpful in familiarizing yourself with Council discussion to date). If possible we should have our recommendations to Council in their April 7 packet. Please call me at 356-5041 if you are unable to attend or have any further questions. cc: Mayor and City Council City Manager MINUTES IOWA CITY SENSITIVE AREAS COMMITTEE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1995 - 11:45 A.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth D. Hudspeth, John Moreland, Jr., Jessica Neary, Sandy Rhodes, George Starr, Dick Hoppin, Tom Scott MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Frantz STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Melody Rockwell, Scott Kugler, Dennis Gannon, Sarah E. Holecek, Charles Denhey CALL TO ORDER: Miklo called the meeting to order at 11:50 A.M. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 1995: Starr moved to approve the January 17, 1995 minutes. Hoppin seconded. The motion was approved unanimously. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED PURPOSE SECTION OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDI- NANCE: Rockwell referred to the February 3, 1995, memo that noted suggested changes in the purpose section of the proposed Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Item two added the words "and define." Holecek summarized her January 31,1995, memo expressing staff concerns with adding "and define." She said the purpose section is intended to provide general guideline statements on the purpose and intent of the ordinance. If ambiguities in the interpretation or implementation arise, then one would look back to the purpose and intent section for the spirit of the ordi- nance. Including "and define" could indicate to those interpreting the ordinance in the future, that a definitive, restrictive interpretation of "reasonable uses" was intended, thus tying the City's hands to make a case by case determination. Secondly, it is doubtful that the ordinance witl be able to define exactly what reasonable uses are for every piece of property given the number of variables involved. Lastly, fulfilling a definition mandate is unlikely. The intent of the ordinance is to provide guidelines and criteria rather than actual definitions. It's reasonable to say the ordinance intends to permit reasonable development of property, but a definition o! reasonable use cannot be developed. Miklo said its impossible to be specific. If "and define" is included, then developers may have an expectation that the City has a definition of exactly how many units can be developed on a parcel with environmentally sensitive areas. That answer wouldn't be known until the development process is undertaken. Ri~odes suggested eliminating "and define" or changing it to "and regulate." Moreland said the role of the Committee is to assist the Planning and Zoning Commission by not being overly specific, but to have some rules set up so a developer can look at a parcel and make some determination without great time and expense. "Define" may be too restric- Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 2 tive and "permit" is too vague and open to interpretation, but some guidelines need to be developed by the Committee. Miklo said that as the ordinance is developed there will be specific criteria for some areas such as wetlands and hydric soils. Toward completion of the ordinance, the beginning section will need to be reviewed. Rockwell inquired about whether there was a consensus to delete the words "and define." Scott thought "and define" could be left in until the ordinance is near completion. Then, the Committee can go back and refine the final language of the ordinance. Moreland agreed. Miklo restated the consensus to review the language near completion of the ordinance, Rockwell said the second proposed change in the purpose section involved integrating urban development with environmentally sensitive areas. As mentioned in the memo, some commu- nities have designated sensitive areas as "protected" or "no-build" areas. One possible revision of purpose three would be to add the word "protected" before the term "environmentally sensitive area." "Protected Sensitive Area" could be defined in the definition section of the ordinance. Scott agreed the "protected sensitive area" will need to be spelled out. Not all areas, due to their size or other factors, can be included. Rockwell checked for consensus on this change. The Committee agreed consensus had been reached on this point. DISCUSSION OF THE EXEMPTION SECTION OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE:. Rockwell said several changes were recommended, such as adding steep slopes and drainage- ways to the exemption for single family and duplex residences. It is the opinion of the staff that adding these conditions to the exemptions will essentially mean an exemption doesn't exist. She said the Committee will need to decide how much this ordinance is to regulate; should the ordinance cover development of individual single family residence and duplexes, or should it cover only larger developments. Miklo said duplexes and single family housing would not have a major impact on the larger ecosystem. A development of 5 to 60 lots would. He suggested that the ordinance focus on the broader goal, and not get hung up on a few minor encroachments. He felt this approach would move the ordinance forward and not have it appear over-regulatory. Neary expressed concerns that additional individual residential units could be built at a later date. Miklo said the exemption is structured so the first residential unit on a tract of land is exempt. Anything after that is a subdivision and not exempt. Incremental development in an environmentally sensitive area would not be permitted. Rhodes said he understood this ordinance would, in part or whole, replace the Grading Ordinance, or some part of it. There is no exemption in that ordinance for single family lots. Miklo said a decision has not been made to replace the Grading Ordinance. Staff will develop a proposal for the Committee to consider. One approach being researched would maintain the Grading Ordinance as it is. In the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, there would be a higher level of requirements than in the Grading Ordinance. Rhodes said he is concerned that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance might be seen as watering down the Grading Ordinance. Denney said when it comes to grading and erosion control, what triggers a higher level of engineering and planning has not been decided. Rhodes said he has reservations. An expansion of a home on a very steep slope could have a large impact. Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 3 Rockwell explained the next modification. Staff was concerned that the 1,0OO square foot or the 20,000 square foot limits of development be the total amount of encroachment over time. It is important to ensure that incremental encroachment will not occur. The words "maximum total" were added. Regarding exemption six, the word "existing" was added tothe term "tree farming operations." Further exemptions may need to be added or made more stringent as the drafting of the ordinance progresses. DISCUSSION OF THE APPLICABILITY SECTION OF THE SENSITIVE AREA ORDINANCE: Rockwell said the Committee selected alternative three with some reservations. The Commit- tee felt that a map is needed to alert developers and property owners to where sensitive areas are located. She said staff suggests a Sensitive Areas Inventory Map accompany the Zoning Map, which would contain a note to consult the Sensitive Areas map before undertaking projects. A brochure could be developed informing developers and property owners in short form what would be expected in environmentally sensitive areas. A small Sensitive Areas map would be included. Rockwell noted at the last meeting, the Committee discussed that overlay zoning will not occur at the outset [upon adoption of the ordinance], but as development happens. Sensitive Planned Development Overlay rezoning would occur in areas where Sensitive Development Plans are approved. Another recommended change was the addition of hydric soils. The applicability section contains a list of sensitive features and definitional criteria, and relies on field verification as well as on the maps listed in the applicability section. Gannon clarified that like the grading ordinance, if land is in a sensitive area, a development plan will need to be approved or an exemption received before development can proceed. Rockwell said the listed sensitive features are a flag. Property owners may show that a sensitive area doesn't exist on their land or doesn't exist to the extent that it would be covered by the ordinance. The sensitive areas features list gives everyone notice that if these sensitive features are on the property, it is likely a development plan will be required. Gannon said slopes of 25% is a 4 to 1 grade incline. He asked why this figure was used. Miklo said one reason is the depiction of steep slopes on the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map is based on the 4:1 ratio. Rockwell said Denney's review of other ordinances showed 25% is often used. Rhodes said two features, prairie remnants and archaeological sites, are listed in the Sensitive Areas Inventory and the Comprehensive Plan. He felt they needed to be addressed. Clarification of development and redevelopment also is needed. Rockwell said the term "development" is intended to include redevelopment. Rhodes said this will need to be spelled out in the ordinance. Miklo said when development is planned where an archaeological site is located, the State Archeologist is notified. The State Archeologist has the ability to regulate and investigate the scene, but the authority is limited. So far, staff's approach has been to look at ecosystems. Miklo asked if the Committee wanted to pursue this issue. Scott asked how many archeologi- cal sites are listed on the Sensitive Areas Map and what they are. Denhey said archeological sites are listed by the number of sites located in each township section. Miklo added the State Archeologist has a record of each site, but the exact location is not public information so the sites can be protected. Rhodes said the archeological sites list is incomplete. Only identified sites are included. Archeological sites are part of our cultural heritage. They are mentioned in the Comprehensive Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 4 Plan and need to be considered. Scott said if the Committee decides not to address archeo- logical sites, this needs to be pointed out in the recommendations and referenced as it may be a policy change. Miklo said the State Archeologist could be asked what his ability is to control these sites, what sites are in Iowa City and give suggestions on how the Committee might approach this. Hoppin said an archeological assessment is required for Department of Transportation projects. Denney said this tied to the use of federal monies. Miklo said the State Archeologist could be asked to address the Committee at an upcoming meeting. The Committee has a July 1, 1995, deadline and the archeological sites involve a whole set of regulations in themselves requiring a different approach and expertise. Scott said if the Committee had some background information to present to the Council as to why or why not archeological sites were included, it would be helpful. Miklo said prairie remnants were not looked at, because the ordinances staff reviewed from other communities did not address them. More research can be done in this area. Rhodes said it is difficult to know where prairie remnants are located. If they are not addressed, it might be assumed they were not addressed, because they were not seen as important. Miklo suggested prairie remnants might be dealt with by an amendment at some future time. The Committee decided to come back to the issue after the general procedural and administrative sections are finished. DISCUSSION OF ADDING HYDRIC SOILS TO THE LIST OF SENSITIVE AREAS: Rockwell said hydric soils are "saturated, flooded or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydric soils that occur in areas having positive indicators of hydrophytic vegeta- tion and wetland hydrology are wetland soils." This type of soil can indicate a potential existence of a wetland and the probable existence of a high water table. Rockwell noted both of these characteristics should be dealt with during a development project. Wetlands are protected under state and federal law and as such are considered to be no-build areas, unless appropriate and approved mitigation measures are undertaken. High water tables require special construction practices. Rockwell said for purposes of the ordinance, staff recommends that only fully hydric soils be considered a sensitive feature. These are the areas that are mapped on the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map and defined by the USDA Soil Conservation Service as such in December 1993. Staff believes that hydric soils, in and of themselves, should not trigger a Sensitive Planned Development Overlay, but should be a flag to indicate the existence of a jurisdictional wetland. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance will require the developer or property owner to verify whether wetlands exist on the site. Rockwell noted this is routinely done now on an informal basis. If staff has any indication a wetland might exist in a location, the developer is asked to verify it with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If fully hydric soils exist, more stringent construction safeguards, particularly for streets, storm water management, sump pump discharge, and elevations of window openings are required. Rockwell said staff also recommends, to the extent possible, that urban development projects be designed so that if there are areas of hydric soils, they would be treated as an environmental asset by using them for storm water detention, wetland enhancement or buffers, protective greenbelts along stream corridors, and neighborhood open space. This would not be required, but would be instituted as a guideline to encourage developers to recognize hydric soils in the development process. Rockwell reiterated the staff Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 5 position that hydric soils, in and of themselves, would not trigger a Sensitive Planned Develop- ment Overlay rezoning. Miklo said for example, a parcel on the west side of Sycamore Street has fairly large amounts of hydric soils. If a subdivision proposal was submitted, the first step would be for the developer to verify whether the area contains a wetland. If it does, the development proposal would need to comply with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. If it does not contain a wetland, but there are basements or streets proposed, there would be additional engineering require- ments. The areas containing hydric soils would also be looked at in terms of storm water retention. The mere existence of hydric soils would not necessarily necessitate a Sensitive Planned Development. Scott said the Neighborhood Open Space ordinance now on the books gives the City greater clout to locate open space in hydric soils areas. Moreland inquired about a situation in which a collector or arterial street was being built towards the outskirts of town and it is discovered the plan is to cross a wetlands. Would it likely be built, but to different standards? Miklo said because there are federal regulations regarding wetlands, the City would be required to get federal permits. An alternative route would be pursued. If the road did have to go through the wetland, the City would need to fulfill mitigation requirements to minimize impacts of the road on the wetland. Scott said it is best if a developer can identify wetlands before building a street. It is easier to go around a wetland than build with mitigation procedures. Rockwell said streets can be built on hydric soils with accommodations. According to the City Engineer, the City does expect the developer to pick up the additional costs. Rhodes thought the fully hydric soils approach, as outlined by staff, was a good way to go. DISCUSSION OF THE WETLANDS SECTION OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE: Kugler said a review of ordinances from across the county showed there were six general topics that need to be addressed: 1) definition of a wetland, 2) classification system to identify which wetlands are more valuable than others, 3) who is responsible for the delinea- tion of a wetland, 4) what type and level of protection will be given to the wetland areas, 5) what type of mitigation will be acceptable, and 6) if and how the property owner will be compensated for the loss in property value as a result of regulation, Kugler said it became clear when considering these issues that broader policy issues must be addressed: Should Iowa City carry local regulations further than those of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers? Should protection extend beyond that regulated by the Corps or perhaps include additional buffers or storm water run-off restrictions? Should additional protection only be extended to significant wetlands? Kugler noted the Committee will need to make a decision regarding the level of wetlands regulation. How this broad policy question is an- swered will affect how each of the six subtopics are addressed. Kugler said current wetland regulations enforced through the Corps are governed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. He said this is limited because the Clean Water Act was not designed to protect wetlands. The Corps regulates filling, dredging and draining activities in wetlands. A permit and notification is required when these activities are going to be undertak- en. One study showed that of the 300,000 acres of wetlands lost each year, only 50,000 acres are covered by Corps regulations. The Corps needs to balance a number of factors including both environmental and economic considerations. Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 6 Kugler said three things need to be considered when looking at the Corps regulations: 1 ) they deal only with the delineated wetland, not activity on adjacent areas which might impact it; 2) the Corps is conservative in delineating wetlands (when examining the same wetland area, the Corps is likely to d~lineate a smaller area than other agencies like the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)); and 3) the Corps does not classify wetlands; all wetlands are treated the same. The District Engineer does have discretion Qn individual permits and wetland quality may be a part of each decision. Kugler noted one important consideration for the Committee in making its initial policy decisions is the long-term impact on the environment. Wetlands have value for flood control, improving water quality, providing shelter for fish and wildlife, and enhancing biodiversity. Wetlands also have aesthetic and recreational value. The Corps regulates only wetlands over one acre in size. The cumulative loss of numerous small wetlands can have a large impact. Kugler said the six subtopics will be impacted by the Committee's initial policy decisions. Whether the City uses the Corps to delineate a wetlands and then requires additional protec- tion will influence what definition is used. Many ordinances which go beyond the Corps' determination use a combination of the Corps and the FWS definition. In most cases, the FWS definition is amended to require that two or three factors must be present for an area to be defined as a wetland. The three factors are hydric soils, hydric vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Kugler said if the Corps is used to do the delineation and control mitigation plans, there is no need to develop a classification system. The Corps does not use a classification system. Some wetlands clearly are more valuable than others for flood control or wildlife. Kugler asked the Committee to consider developing a classification system. Kugler said it is also important to determine who will delineate the boundaries of a wetland. Should the City rely on the Corps, consider hiring a consultant on a case by case basis, use a City staff person, or use existing staff with the assistance of a technical advisory committee? If the City plans to regulate small wetlands, the Corps wil~ not be of assistance. Kugler said concerning mitigation, if the Corps is used, it will not necessarily consider avoid- ance and minimization to be priorities over compensatory mitigation. This has caused prob- lems between different federal agencies, such as the EPA, FWS, and the Soil Conservation Service. Kugler said concerning the issue of compensation, if the City plans to regulate beyond the Corps, consideration of compensating an owner needs to be addressed to avoid the taking issue. Kugler said staffing also needs to be considered. If the City decides to go wetl beyond the Corps' regulations, someone local may be needed with expertise, perhaps a City staff member. Miklo said the Committee needs to decide whether to take the Corps' regulations and modify them, or develop more elaborate regulations. Scott asked if a combination of the Corps and FWS definitions was used for Sycamore Farms. Miklo said the developer asked the Corps to make a determination, but the Corps was unable to do so in a timely fashion. The developer hired a consultant to make a determination based on the criteria used by the Corps and FWS. Even if the Corps' regulations did not apply, the City's conservation easement calls for protecting all of those wetlands areas identified in the consultant's findings. Moreland asked how many wetlands under one acre are located in the City. It appears on the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map that most wetlands are over one acre. If the Committee doesn't use the Corps guidelines, it may be difficult to find the expertise needed to write the Iowa City Sensitive Areas Committee February 7, 1995 Page 7 urdinance given the July 1 deadline. Miklo said there are some reasonable and tried models used in other communities of regulating wetlands beyond what the Corps regulates. Those approaches could be applied in Iowa City fairly easily. Moreland said if the City regulates beyond the Corps, money to administer the ordinance must be., available. Miklo said it may require at least a half-time staff person if other communities are an indication. The Council will need to decide' how to pay for staff, whether through bJdget allocations or fees collected during the development process. Moreland said the Committee needs to know if money is going to be available before proceeding to develop r~;gulation beyond the Corps, Miklo said it is unknown at this time if money will be available. Rockwell said as the Committee proceeds with drafting the ordinance, it will need to be mindful of staffing considerations. Rhodes said it is cheaper to hire staff now than compen- sate after a disaster, such as happened to the trailers located in the floodplain. It is a good iqvestment if the City can direct developers to areas where disasters will not happen, Scott said the Sycamore Farms project demonstrated that there a number of local resources available with a high level of expertise. If the Committee just takesthe Corps' definition, there are too many instances where things are done thinking the Corps regulates them when, in t=act, they do not. Scott said it was his recollection that the Sycamore Farms project used a definition which was agreed to by both the Corps and the FWS. This definition was to get promulgated, but got held up in the last years of the Bush Administration. Two of the t, hree conditions present in the FWS criteria was the standard Scott remembered discussing, It is generally per,ceived as the standard. Rhodes said he was content with the Corps delineation, but the City should go beyond the Corps in regulating what can happen there. The Corps functions as a permitting agency and is fairly loose in what it will let happen. The delineation need not be by the Corps; it could be by a consultant. The Corps definition of a wetland is defensible. Holecek said the City could use the Corps for delineation and apply more stringent regulations. The Corps could then approve mitigation measures. This would ease administrative pressures. Neary said the staffing costs should be paid for by the developers, It should be the responsibil- ity of the developer to hire a consultant to determine if there is a wetland on the property. This was the case in New Jersey where Neary worked for an engineering firm. Miklo said that is an approach the City took with Sycamore Farms. There may be additional staff time reviewing the plans submitted by the engineers and verifying that construction is being done according to the plans. There will be additional costs and the Council will need to be advised of that. SCHEDULING THE NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be March 7, 1995, at 11:45 a.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned a 1:30 P.M, Minutes submitted by Mike Brace. ppdadmin\mins\sac2.7.mln MINUTES IOWA CITY SENSITIVE AREAS COMMITTEE TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 1995 - 11:45 A.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: 8eth D. Hudspeth, Bill Frantz, Dick Hoppin, John Moreland, Jr., Jessica Neary, Sandy Rhodes, Tom Scott, George Starr MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Melody Rockwell, Scott Kugler, Dennis Gannon, Sarah E. Holecek CALL TO ORDER Miklo called the meeting to order at 11:55 a.m., and suggested that the discussion of the Committee be focused primarily on the proposed wetlands section of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 7, 1995, MINUTES Rhodes suggested that the word "owners" be added to the last sentence of the second paragraph on page 2. Scott moved that the February 7, 1995, Sensitive Areas Committee minutes be approved as amended. Starr seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously. REVIEW OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Miklo stated the schedule was put together with an eye to meeting the deadline of having the Sensitive Areas Ordinance before Council for its consideration by July 1, 1995. Rockwell stated that staff recognized the schedule was optimistic as to the amount of work that needed to be accomplished within a short period of time. The schedule provided some target dates. She said the Committee may want to schedule additional meetings or tonger meetings in the future. The only date several Committee members could not meet on was March 28, 1995. That meeting was rescheduled for Monday, March 20, 1995. Scott suggested scheduling a night meeting toward the end of the drafting process. COMMENT ON CUMULATIVE DRAFT OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE Miklo noted a cumulative draft of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance that had been included in the Committee's packet. The draft contains sections of the ordinance that have been discussed by the Committee, and on which the Committee has achieved a general consensus. Miklo noted these sections are subject to change. He pointed out that staff anticipated §oing back at a later date to edit out conflicts with later sections. Scott stated it was his assumption that staff would update the cumulative draft after each Committee meeting so that it represented the cumulative agreement of the Committee to date. Miklo said yes. Rhodes commented that he'd been pushing hard on including hydric soils in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, but he wanted to point out that it wasn't a panacea. He discussed the problems of water bleeding from the joints of streets in the Penfro/Sunset area, where there are soils that are not fully hydric, but are soils with hydric inclusions. He said limitations have to be considered, even for soils that are not classified as fully hydric. Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 2 DISCUSSION OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS SECTION Miklo stated staff's general approach for the submittal requirements section was to use some of the same procedures that are now used for development applications, such as site plan review or planned development overlay rezonings. In most cases, the submittal listing includes items the developers are already required ~o submit. There will be some additional submittal requirements to deal with the sensitive features of properties. For example, if the property contains wetlands, the developer will need to submit some additional information on wetlands. Rockwell explained that staff wanted to expedite the development process so there are not delays due to developers having to fill out different applications with different submittal requirements. Rockwell said staff was proposing a two-tiered approach. She said the sensitive features on a property may not warrant a planned development overlay rezoning. For example, if a property had hydric soils on it, but no other sensitive features, staff suggests that a sensitive areas site plan review be required, but not a planned development overlay rezoning. This would involve the same submittal requirements as for a standard site plan review with a few additional requirements pertaining to hydric soils. Rockwell said staff suggests that the site plan review be handled administratively unless appealed to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Rockwell said if a site has sensitive features, such as wetlands or slopes with gradients of 25% or more, a sensitive planned development overlay rezoning could be required. She said staff was suggesting essentially the same submittal requirements as for the site plan review plus some planned development overlay zone requirements. Rockwell asked the Committee members to keep in mind what the thresholds should be for various sensitive features as they moved through drafting the ordinance; what should only require a site plan review, and what should require a planned development overlay rezoning. The planned development rezoning would be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Starr clarified that even though the property was classified as sensitive on the map, it may not end up with an overlay rezoning on it. He asked if there should be any concern about not having an overlay rezoning for such properties. Miklo said he didn't think so as long as the thresholds are appropriately set, He said the Committee has decided that hydric soils are an area of concern and may require some double-checking, but hydric soils alone do not warrant an overlay rezoning. He said as the Committee moves through the process, it will need to develop the thresholds. Scott said an administrative review was appropriate for single lots, but once a major subdivision was involved, an overlay rezoning should be required. Moreland said he is often involved with the site plan review process, and he felt it had been very effective from the development standpoint. He thought City staff had been very good about reviewing site plans and getting information back to the developer in a timely manner. Moreland said to involve the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council in reviewing small development projects did not make sense. He thought if the Committee could spell some things out for staff to look at, it would be better to handle small projects administratively. Miklo said on the other hand, there may be a case of industrial development involving construction of one building on one lot that would destroy large areas of woodlands. That may be tho type of case that the Committee would want reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 3 Commission and the City Council. Moreland said maybe the threshold could be set by the size of the land involved. Rockwell said there may be a blend of factors to be considered; the extent of development as well as the level of sensitive features on the tract. Scott questioned including a date in the regulation relating to hydric soils. He asked if it should reference the "current" definition of fully hydric soils by the USDA Soil Conservation Service rather than tieing the definition to the December 1993 date. Rockwell said the date was relevant, because the fully hydric soils shown on the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map were the soils defined as fully hydric in December 1993 by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Since that time, the SCS has revised the fully hydric soils listing. Scott understood the need for the regulations to be consistent with the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map, but when the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map is updated, the date referenced in the hydric soils regulation will need to be updated as well. Rhodes said that buffers are mentioned in the information received on specific sensitive features, but are not included as part of the submittal requirements. Miklo said this would be something to add into the submittal requirements as the Committee reached agreement on individual sections of the ordinance. DISCUSSION OF WETLANDS SECTION Miklo stated that the Committee had briefly discussed wetlands at its February 7 meeting. He said Kugler had drafted proposed definitions and regulations for the Committee's consideration today. Kugler said the wetland regulations being proposed by staff would be in addition to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' current regulation of wetlands. The definition and delineation of wetlands would be based on the Corps' standards. When it is determined there is a wetland, additional buffers and site development standards would be applied. Kugler went through the purpose section, which sets forth the reasons for implementing a higher degree of protection for wetland areas. Rhodes asked that the first purpose statement be amended to read "stormwater detention areas" instead of "stormwater recharge areas," and inserting the phrase "recharging groundwater resources" immediately after the phrase "improving water quality." Rhodes also suggested amending the fourth purpose statement to read "a greaterdegree of protection" rather than "a higher degree of protection." Moreland asked if purpose four meant we intended to regulate wetlands above and beyond the Army Corps of Engineers. Kugler said the definition and delineation would be the same as the Corps, but the buffers and setback requirements would be additional. Moreland clarified that the Committee was not dealing with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service definition of wetlands. Kugler pointed out that Section B simply stated that approval of a plan under this section of the ordinance did not relieve property owners from meeting the requirements of other local, state or federal agencies. Kugler said Section C, the definitions section, starts with the Corps definition of wetlands, except for the last two sentences, which read as follows: All natural wetlands will be assumed to be Class A Wetlands, as defined in this Chapter, unless a property owner can demonstrate otherwise. A wetland specialist may be required to make this determination if deemed necessary by the City." This is intended to address the lack of anyone on City staff that has the expertise to assess wetland classifications. Kugler said staff ' would assume wetlands were of the highest quality unless information was received that proved otherwise. Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 4 Miklo said the Sycamore Farms annexation and rezoning provided an example of how that might work. A condition of the rezoning was delineation and protection of the wetlands on the property. The developer had approached the Corps of Engineers regarding delineation of the jurisdictional wetlands, and was told there would be some delay. Rather than wait or hold up the development process, the developer hired a consultant to delineate the wetlands, and also to distinguish between the higher grade wetlands and those that had been degraded by farming activities. Based on the consultant's study, the developer was able to submit a plan that included some stormwater detention facilities located within the wetland areas most able to accommodate them. Miklo pointed out the City had gained positive experience using the approach outlined in Kugler's memo. Kugler said because it appears there are no certified wetland specialists in the Iowa City area, the definition for "wetland specialist" includes the phrase, "a person who can demonstrate to the City that they have expertise in the delineation of wetlands based on federal definitions," Kugler had checked with Wayne Petersen, who is with the Soil Conservation Service and is planning on going through the certification process. Although the course is open to anyone who is interested and willing to pay the fee, Petersen was not aware of anyone else in the area who is certified. Starr wondered if the definition should specify who will make the final decision for the City that the person has sufficient wetlands expertise. Miklo said the term, "the City," is usually interpreted to mean the City Manager or designee. In this case, it would probably be handled by someone designated by the Director of Housing and Inspection Services. Miklo thought that staff from the Public Works Department would also be involved. Scott said part of the reason the City bought into the Sycamore Farms process was that Stanley Engineerin~o delineated all the wetlands that appeared on the Soil Conservation Service maps, and were accepted by the Corps and the SCS as jurisdictional wetlands. Buffer areas around the designated wetlands were incorporated into the site plan. Scott felt it was not difficult to accept a site plan that conforms to what is known about the site. He said the difficulty comes when a developer wants to go contrary to what is published or accepted concerning the wetlands on a site. Scott said whomever the developer hired would have to show the City that they have an acceptable level of expertise. Starr said he felt comfortable with this explanation. Scott added that the City is referred to in the ordinance in its collective sense. Kugler introduced the four classes of wetlands, Classes A through D, with Class A being the most pristine. Kugler said the proposed classification system was based on categories used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to define mitigation goals, which range from no loss to minimizing the loss of wetland habitat. The specific criteria used to determine each class of wetland were drawn from wetland protection ordinances from around the country. Kugler said the three features listed under the Class A Wetlands were found in virtually every wetlands protection ordinance he reviewed. In many cases, a particular species, such as a bird or fish, important to that region was also specifically listed. Kugler said the Class B Wetlands are not as pristine as the Class A Wetlands, but still are considered important and are generally in their natural state. The first criterion for Class B Wetlands described "wetlands greater than one acre in size that, under normal conditions, contain standing water throughout the calendar year." Rhodes said this was one provision he was troubled about, because Iowa tended to go through substantial drought - flood cycles. He said even during the lower magnitude droughts, many genuine wetlands do tend to dry up; Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 5 there is not standing water in them year round. He suggested using the term, "during an average water year," or "average rainfall year," instead of the term, "under normal conditions." Hoppin said its always a problem when you use the terms "normal" and "average." He said in this case, the term "average" was the most appropriate. Rhodes said clarification was needed, because a farmer may consider a year normal or average, because he or she can plow a field and plant corn, but it may not be an average precipitation year at a~l. Kugler said item two had to do with wooded wetlands. The thought was there needed to be a higher level of protection when more than one sensitive feature existed together on a site. Item three deals with the proximity of wetlands to the Iowa River Corridor. Kugler said this type of provision was used by a number of communities in Michigan, where there was concern about preserving water quality. He said it's also important from the standpoint of flood control. Neary asked about including Ralston Creek as well as the river corridor. She said it is a major tributary to the Iowa River, and is related to flood control for the community. She thought perhaps it would be considered a stream corridor. Scott asked if all of the stream corridors were mapped. He related the difficulties of determining the "top of the bank" several years ago during a large scale development plan review for a cement plant in the south part of town. Scott thought if that difficulty occurred on the Iowa River, it would be especially difficult to determine the "top of the bank" on the tributaries. Hoppin agreed, and said in cases where there are terraces, it would be easy to determine the top of the riverbank. But in other cases, the bank may slope up gradually to the top of the drainage divide. There isn't any "top of the bank," as such. Kugler asked if it would be better to have the setback from the established floodway for a river or creek. Scott said the floodway line is something the developers are used to working with, because no development, building or fill of any type are permitted in the floodway. Scott said if there is a setback from the floodway, the ordinance will actually limit developm- ent in the floodpla,n. Scott thought the Committee might get into a nightmare of trying to define "top of bank," whereas floodways are established. Rhodes said that floodway limits can change when the flood maps are revised. But Rhodes thought that Scott's idea of tieing the setback to the floodway was a good one, because a federal agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), would be making that determination. Rhodes also noted the Corps and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources deal with determining the "top of the bank" all the time. If the setback was going to be tied to that, he recommended talking to one of those two agencies. Rockwell said staff was working on the stream corridor section of the ordinance, and would probably rely on the floodway ~imits, to establish the line where the setback begins. To make it consistent among sections of the ordinance, it may, be better to use the floodway in the wetlands section as well. For example, if wetlands are located within 500 feet of a floodway, they may qualify as Class 8 Wetlands. Gannon noted that the floodway designation had been removed from some sections of Ralston Creek when the flood maps were revised in 1985. Rhodes thought the floodway was still shown for the branches of Ralston Creek. Kugler said staff could check on it, and modify the definition prior to the next meeting. Kugler said most wetlands will probably fall into the Class C category.. They are basically any wetland over one acre in size that are not classified as A or B wetlands, or under one acre in size that contain a diversity of habitat or plant species, Kugler noted that Class D Wetlands are mainly smaller isolated wetlands and man-made wetlands. Staff proposed that the Class Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, ~995 Page 6 D wetlands not be regulated in terms of requiring a buffer. He pointed out the definition for "man-made wetlands," and noted some of the largest wetlands in North America are marshes in Alaska that were created when a railroad went through. Water dammed up on one side of the railroad embankment caused wetlands to develop. Scott said in all reality, the City likely would be dealing with farm ponds in annexation areas. He said because of their nature or the way they were developed, farm ponds have some of the criteria listed for being ,'Jesignated a wetland. Scott thought there would be a problem protecting man-made farm ponds that were not created to be wetlands, and probably would not have been created if the farmer had known that the farm pond might be classified as a wetland. He thought old sand and gravel pits that had been idle for years might also pose a problem in annexation areas. Miklo said Sand Lake, which was a sand and gravel pit years ago, had been designated as a wetland by the Corps. This designation was due, in part, to waterfowl using the site. Rhodes said it was also because the lake is so close to the Iowa River. Rhodes thought the Stevens' sand pits south of town would need to be reviewed during a rezoning of the area, whether or not the property was within the City at the time. Scott agreed. Miklo pointed out the Stevens' sand pits are shown on the Sensitive Areas Inventory Map as a potential wetland. Moreland asked who was going to define "diversity of habitat or plant species" for point two under Class C Wetlands. Kugler said that would need to be looked at by a wetland specialist. He said anyone trained in delineating wetlands is familiar with wetland vegetation and should be able to make that determination. Kugler agreed the term "diversity" was pretty vague, and perhaps would need to be defined more specifically. Rhodes said farm ponds provide for stormwater detention, silt interception and wildlife habitat. Perhaps they deserve to be mitigated by replacement, if nothing else. Rhodes said he supported staff's contention that man-made wetlands should be included in the ordinance. Kugler said a farm pond may exist as a wetland, and if it has evolved to serve these other functions, it should be up to the property owner or developer to demonstrate which class of wetland it is. Rockwell asked if this type of wetland could be incorporated into the stormwater detention facility for a site. She thought a farm pond could be used as an asset on the property, Neary concurred. She said it was unlikely that a developer would want to fill in a farm pond. Scott said when the Corps delineates a wetland, it doesn't necessarily classify it as A, B or C. Kugler agreed. But realistically, some wetlands merit a greater degree of protection and mitigation than others. Scott said if the Corps' definition for jurisdictional wetlands is used, all the wetlands classified as A, B or C would end up within that definition. He questioned how many times Class D Wetlands would end up within the Corps definition. He also questioned writing a maze of regulations, if they were not necessacy. He said why don't we just say, "Jurisdictional wetlands as defined by the Corps will be protected," Kugler said that is basically the approach staff has proposed. He said excluding Class D Wetlands, the only two items that would not be covered within the Corps definition of wetlands would be item two under Class C Wetlands concerning smaller wetland areas that contain a diversity of habitat or plant species, and item three under Class B Wetlands regarding wetlands within a certain distance of the river. All of the other wetlands are over an acre in size, and would fall under the Corps' wetlands definition. Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 7 Scott asked why wetlands should be ranked in different classes, Miklo explained that according to the proposed draft, the first test was whether an area is classified as a wetland or not. If it is, then it is automatically assumed to be a Class A Wetland, which has a 100 foot buffer. The proposed classification system allows the developer to show that a wetland is a subgrade of a Class A Wetland that allows a reduced buffer width. Kugler said it basically says we are providing protection for all wetlands defined as such by the Corps, but we recognize that some wetlands have more value than others; some wetlands should have a 1 O0 foot buffer and some only need a 25 foot buffer. Moreland asked if the Corps required a 100 foot buffer for a Class A Wetland. Miklo said the 100 foot buffer was what was being proposed above and beyond the Corps' requirements. Moreland asked if the proposed buffer widths were used by any other city in Iowa. Kugler said he was not aware of any cities in Iowa that imposed buffers around wetlands. He said he had reviewed ordinances from other midwestern communities and counties located in Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, Missouri and Wisconsin. Miklo said the classification system allows the buffer width to be reduced for less valued wetlands. Scott thought the proposed classification system would create a heck of a lot of regulation just to catch two additional areas that are not covered under the Corps' definition, that is, B3 (small wetlands adjacent to the Iowa River) and C2 (wetlands that are less than one acre but contain a diversity of habitat or plant species). He said B3 could be dealt with in the stream corridors section of the ordinance. He thought C2 would probably be open to the most interpretation, and thus the most problematic. He asked again why all the classifications were needed. He said when the City dealt with Sycamore Farms, everyone seemed to have a pretty good handle on what jurisdictional wetlands were and what mitigation was needed. He thought the classification system would be terribly confusing for the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council, developers and staff alike. Kugler asked if a 100 foot buffer should be required for all jurisdictional wetlands. Scott said that's where he'd start, and then someone would have to convince him otherwise that it ought to be less. Miklo asked if there was a way to restructure or reformat the ordinance to attain the same goal in a less confusing way. He asked if it would help to have only two classes of wetlands. Scott felt there was no need for subgroups. He said the ordinance should start with the Corps' definition of wetlands and a requirement for a 100 foot buffer unless there was a legitimacy for making the buffer less than 100 feet wide. He thought it allowed for more flexibility in designing mitigation, especially if the wetlands were going to be used for stormwater detention. It provides 100 feet for runoff and settling of sedimentation prior to stormwater entering the wetlands. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission's experience has been that the simpler approach has worked pretty decently. Rhodes said with Sycamore Farms, the 100 foot buffer only comes into play for wetland~ outside of the conservation easement. He said it was relatively easy to determine the boundaries, because there was a clear break at the top of the slope. He thought Sycamore Farms was far more clear cut than, for example, properties along the Iowa River. Scott said the 100 foot buffer had been imposed around wetlands outside of the conservation easement on the Sycamore Farms property, and that had worked pretty well. Rockwell asked if the 100 foot buffer should be imposed around Sand Lake. Scott said that was a somewhat different situation, because it's a man-made lake. Rockwell said it is defined by the Corps as a jurisdictional wetland. When Scott asked if Sand Lake was considered a potential wetland, Rhodes confirmed that the Corps had classified Sand Lake as a jurisdictional wetland. Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 8 Moreland thought Scott was right; that the ordinance should be kept as simple as possible. He said adecision needed to be made about the size of the buffer, He thought the ordinance should start with the Corps definition and a 100 foot buffer. Then it would come down to the Planning and Zoning Commission setting the buffer when it reviewed the planned development overlay rezoning. Miklo suggested ~eformatting the ordinance as Scott and Moreland had suggested, and listing criteria or guidelines to consider for reducing the buffer width. The Planning and Zoning Commission and ultimately, the Council can use the criteria as a basis for reducing the buffer width. The Committee agreed to consider the suggested revisions at its next meeting. Miklo said the Committee would then have two alternatives to consider. The first being the current draft, which includes the A-D classifications for the purpose of specifying the required buffer if any. The second would not classify wetlands, but would allow the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to establish the appropriate buffer width based on specific criteria. Scott asked for an explanation of the difference between the required buffer and the required setback under Section E. Kugler said the required buffer is the distance around the wetland that needs to be maintained as a natural buffer. The setback area is a no-build area that is similar to the rear yard setback requirements in most residential zones. It is essentially a 120 foot setback for building construction. Kugler said when a building is being constructed, there will be some site disturbance outside of the foundation line. The setback area allows for this, and also provides a filter strip for the runoff from the building or parking area; it prevents pollution from directly entering the buffer area. Using an overhead transparency, Miklo explained the wetland buffer and setback concepts. Scott and Moreland agreed there would probably be a 20 foot setback on most lots anyway to meet the rear yard setback requirements. Neary said the buffer was to remain undisturbed, She wondered if 20 feet provided enough room for gradi.~g and construction equipment. Miklo and Scott said it should be sufficient for most building projects. Scott said if Sand Lake had a 100 foot buffer and a 20 foot setback, that would allow a trail system all around Sand Lake. He said he wasn't sure that was unrealistic. Moreland thought it was important to have some flexibility built into the ordinance to reduce the buffer width based on the type of wetland on the property. Hoppin asked if the wetlands and buffer areas would be dedicated to the City. Miklo said that is one of the options. It could also be owned by a homeowners association. Scott asked how much of the wetland area could be counted as Neighborhood Open Space, Rockwell said the actual wetland itself could count as 10% of the required open space, but anything above the high water level could be counted, if it was considered usable and appropriate as open space for that particular district. She said as with the informal calculations for the Whispering Meadows wetlands, any place you can put a trail can count. Scott said he agreed that there should be some flexibility, but he thought it would be a whole lot easier to start with jurisdictional wetlands and a 100 foot buffer, and then allow a maximum reduction if the developer can show there are good reasons to reduce the buffer width. Hoppin said he didn't see a great deal of difference between the different classes of wetlands proposed; that it would be simpler to use Scott's approach. He asked whether Class D was a separate class. Miklo said yes, for example, Sand Lake may be considered a Class D Wetland that doesn't require City regulation, although the Corps would continue to regulate' it in terms of filling. Scott said if the Corps regulates Sand Lake as a jurisdictional wetland, he thought the ordinance should start with a 100 foot buffer, and negotiate downward if it Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 9 can be shown that a reduction is warranted. Scott thought it made more sense and was more understandable to proceed in this way instead of having to deal with al~ the different classifications. Kugler said he could revise the ordinance to remove the classes of wetlands, but use the criteria listed under each class as guidelines for wi~ether or not to reduce the buffer width. Miklo said the same goal would be in place, the ordinance would simply be restructured. Starr asked if the criteria were being removed with the wetland classes. Rockwell said no, the criteria listed within each class of wetland would be incorporated into the buffer section as guidelines for determining whether the buffer width shouJd be reduced from 1 O0 feet. Rhodes said he had one problem with Scott's approach. He said we are talking about reducing the buffer width down. He thought there could always be good financial arguments made for doing that, and he wasn't sure that was what Scott was intending. Scott said no, the criteria that will be listed are not based on financial considerations. He said on natural delineated wetlands, by and large, he expected the Planning and Zoning Commission would stick with the 100 foot buffer. Holecek said if a reduction is granted, the Commission could set out its "findings of fact;" the reasons for reducing the required buffer width. Scott agreed that was why it was important to have criteria to use in making such decisions. Kugler briefly discussed the wetland delineation section, particularly item two which allows a developer to opt out of a planned development overlay rezoning if the wetland area and a 150 foot buffer are set apart from the development area through a conservation easement or dedication to the City. Scott said he was concerned that subsequent development might impact the wetlands, especially if the wetlands are to be used for stormwater management. Kugler said if the wetland area and 150 foot buffer is eliminated from the development plan, then stormwater detention would need to be provided somewhere else, not within the wetland easement area. Scott said if the wetlands were truly set aside and the development would not impact the wetlands, then it made sense not to require a planned development. Scott said there needs to be some mechanism to ensure that mitigation measures are undertaken, however, if the development impacts the wetlands in any way. He said there should be no direct discharge of stormwater into a wetland. Kugler said the regulations listed on the next page for wetlands protection would still apply. He said he could incorporate that provision into this section of the ordinance. Rhodes recommended a language change for item one under Wetland Delineation. Immediately following the words "Sensitive Areas Inventory Map - Phase I," he suggested that the item read: "the property owner shall be responsible for providing a delineation of the wetland area(s) prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers..." Rhodes said there were a couple of changes he'd suggest for the Wetland Regulations section. He thought the word "dredging" should be added immediately following the word "grading." For items six and seven, he suggested adding the words "or varieties" immediately following the term "invasive species," because there are some varieties of native species that have been bred that are extremely aggressive, and could reduce the diversity of plants within a wetland. Scott suggested that it read "or their varieties." Neary asked whether the erosion control measures mentioned in F5 should be defined. Miklo said those measures are set forth in the Grading Ordinance. Rockwell asked if Neary thought the Grading Ordinance should be referenced. Neary said yes, it could probably say "erosion control measures as set forth in Section ...." Neary said F2 was also vague. It states that "any development activity excepted under Sections ..... shall be designed and constructed to Sensitive Areas Committee March 7, 1995 Page 10 minimize the impact on the identified wetland." She thought the wording of this section left a lot open to interpretation; there are many different ways to design to minimize impacts. She wondered if there should be some design guidelines, Kugler pointed out this guideline was for activities that were excepted from the ordinance regulations, and was intended to encourage developers and property owners to ad. dress wetlands protection even if their situation is exempt from the regulations set forth in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Scott said concerning transfer of project density, he knew the City Attorney's office wanted to get into transfer of density to other properties, He wondered if there was a way, however, to increase the density on the same property on the portion of the tract that does not contain sensitive features. Rhodes asked if such a detailed density transfer table was needed; if it could be reduced to about half the number of categories shown, Rockwell pointed out that the density transfer concept could apply to other sensitive features as well as wetlands, and could be incorporated into a common section of the ordinance, not restricted to the wetlands section, Miklo pointed out that planned development overlay rezoning allows for clustering of development, an increase in density on the portion of the tract outside of the sensitive areas, Scott asked how this would be controlled or monitored. Rockwell said it could be handled through the planned development process; essentially, you don't get a transfer of density unless you do a planned development overlay rezoning. Scott concurred with that notion. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:25 p,m. Minutes submitted by Melody Rockwell Grassroots In the wake of the OTC LEV debate, more and more attention is being given to the 20~20 Vision recently published, "Beat- ing the Bureaucracy. A Citizen's Guide to Lobbying the Administration." By lustrating which agencies track and re- spond to letters, providing tips on in- creasing the effectiveness of letter writ- ing, and explaining when to use the media as a tool for communication, the guide provides advocates with the information they need to feel comfortablo interacting and influencing the Administration. Ca[I Cheryl Haeseker of 20/20 Vision, 202 833-2020, for a copy. The '95 American Tour de Sol road rally championship for electric and solar electric vehicles will take place May 20- 27 from Waterbury, VT to Portland, ME. The race will also travel through CT, MA, and NH. Participants include the Big Three, independent electric vehic[e manu- facturers, students, and entrepreneurs from both here and abroad. Contact NESEA, 413-774-6051. The Rail-Volution is coming[ Join na- tional and regional policy-makem, citi- zen activists, and transportation profes- sionals in Portland, Oregon, September 16-18, 1995. The conference includes thought-provoking workshops, forums and presentations showcasing successful rail systems, transit-oriented develop- ments and citizen participation processes from around the counUy. For moreinfur- marion, contact Rail-Volution, 1-800- 788-7077. The Gas Guzzler Campaign is pleased to announce Island Press' recent publica- tion of "Future Drive". Authored by Daniel Sperling, director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Davis, the book addresses the adverse energy and environmental consequences of in- creasing automobile travel and analyzes strategies for creating a more environ- mentally friendly transportation system. GG has a limited number of copies avail- able for members, free of charge. effects of personal automobile use. Environmental concerns coupled with the cost of repairs, maintenance, traffic, and parking (not to mention the cost of the vehicle itsel0 prevent many potential car owners from actually purchasing a car. In response to these growing needs, companies both hem and abroad have developed co-ups where members share cars, therefore reducing the volume of vehicles on the mad. In addition, members pay only as much as they drive, giving them the benefits of car ownership without the financial stress. The largest co-up in operation today is a Berlin company known as Statlauto. With 3,000 members and a fleet of 100 vehicles, members are able to get the car of their choice 90% of the time. There are 26 branches in Berlin with approximately 2 to 7 cars at each location. The average member is within I 0 minutes of a branch. The Startauto collection of vehicle options includes cars, pickup trucks, vans, buses, wagons, assotted electric vehicles, and work-bikes. The company offers services such as delivery of heavier packages and a "moonshine rate," providing women with the opportunity to drive free between midnight and 8am so that they can avoid walking during unsafe hours. Membership with Stattauto requires an initial investment of $600-$900, which is refundable upon departure, an initiation fee of $75, and monthly dues which average $5- $8. Upon join ing, members receive a key card which allows them access to the lots, se ryes as a Berlin mass transit pass, andean be ased for taxicharges. Billing isdone on amonthly basis according to kilometars traveled and hours ofase. If needed, Stattauto also provides bike and luggage racks free of charge as well as child seats. Arwed Kuhne, a graduate student in Berlin and former Surface Transportation Policy Project intern, explains that car sharing is a positive approach to curbing pollution. Individuals are taking their own initiative to reduce vehicle miles travelled rather than waiting for the government to come up with a solution. Members of Stattauto will find that they can reducetheir vehicle milestraveled from 8700km (ifthey hadacer)to 4000km per year. Communities interested in starting a car co-up should consider the effectiveness of their current transportation system, if their area includes a diverse group of people willing to give up their personal passenger vehicles to improve air quality, and if a group is available to take on the organizational tasks associated with running this type of program. Other than the activities in Berlin, a co-up has formed in Quebec, Canada which now h as 234 mere bors and 6 cars. Closer to home, there is a group developing in the Los Angeles area as well as an established group in Eugene, Oregon (for more information on the Eugene co-up including a start-up kit, call 5023-683-150,1.) In Need of Earth Day Ideas? The Gas Guzzler Campaign recently completed its Activities Guide for the25thAnniversaryofE~h Day! The 10pagelistingofferssuggestionson what you can do in your personal life, neighborhood, community, business and as a bicycle advocate to travel in a more environmentally responsible way! Members call GG now for your free copy! Non-members, $5. When sending a change of address, please include your old address! Thank you! The Gas Guzder Campaign newstettersuggests activities for Campaign participants, provides information on fuel efficient transpotation and updates its readers on what other Campaign members are doing around the country. The Campaign welcomes contributions for this newsletter. Editor: Linda Horvath Staff Writer: Jenny Sloan Printed on unbleachedpaper recycled from I00% po.tt. consumer waste. Io: I Jolm~on Cotm~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Charles 13. Duffy, Chairperson Stephen P. Lacin~ Don Selu: Sally StuBman March 21, 1995 INFO~ MEETING Agenda 1. Call to order 9:00 a.m. 2. Review' of the informal and forma~ minutes of March 14th. Business from Charles Panzer re: Veterans Affairs update/discussion. Business from Gerry Lackender re: Senior Center update/discussion. Business from Mike Sullivan, Director of Ambulance Department re: bid for VA Ambulance service/discussion. ,q/~r~t< ,,~ ?t,,ear,m,,i,r~r W~' ~ g'c~r.Y Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) u~scuss~on re: ~towa ~oepartment of Hufi/'a"ff Services Communityo~,~ Mental Health Center Affiliation/Waiver request. ..~r~' b) Discussion re: use of Johnson County Courthouse as backdrop for ~ c) d) introduction and ending narrative for Domestic Abuse Educational video sponsored by Young Lawyers Association. Reports Other 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 13~0 IOWA CITY, IOWA $2244,.1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000 PAX: (319) Agenda 3-21-95 Page 2 7. Business from the Co~mty Attorney. Discussion from the public. Recess o Executive Session to discuss strategy regarding collective bargaining with administrative unit. Other FORMAL MEETING TO' FOLLOW 1. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Action re: bid for VA Ambulance contract. 2. A~ournment. Prooosed Contract Language Changes Transfer Stand §vStatus Transfer Stand - by Status 1). Be able to require that all new hires be requked to can'y a pager for the purposes of stuffing local and long distance trasnsfers for up to 120 hours per month. These employees will be hired for the purposes of staffing transfers and special event~ only and will be considered in "secondao, status". 2). Be able to mandate that current staff members ca~y a pager for the purposes of staffing local and long dislance transfers for up to 24 hours per month. 3). All slaff members in transfer stand by status will be paid one dollar per hou~ and be required to report to the station within 30 minutes of being paged. If paged the employee shall receive a minimum of one hour at the appropriate rate of pay. Mandatory Overtime. 1). Be able to mandatory all new hires and current employees for the purpose of doing local and long distance transfers. Mandatory overtime for transfers will be handled in the same manner as it is for mandatory overtime to .sJaffthe department. To: IO~ CI~ CLERK From: 0oord of Supervisors 3-22-95 8:39am p. 2 oF 4 Johnsen Counly Chades D. Duffy, ChaL,'pcrson ~o~ Bottom Stophen P. Lac{na Don So~ Sally S~tsm~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS March 23, 1995 FORMAL MEETING Agenda 1. Call to order 9:00 a.m. 2. Action re: claims 3. Action re: informal and formal minutes of March 14th. 4. Action re: payroll authorizations 5. Business from the County Auditor. a) Action re: permits b) Action m: reports 1. Clerk's February monthly report. c) Other 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000 FAX: (319) 356-6086 To: IO~CI~CLERK [ree: Board or S~pervisor~ 3-22-95 8:33am p. 3 of 4 Agenda 3-23-95 Page 2 6. Business from the Assistant Zoning Administrator. a) Discussion/action re: the following Platting applications: Application 89484 of Eldon T. Ivliller requesting final plat approval of Joetown Acker Heim Estates, Part Two, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the NWq 1/4 of Section 28; Township 78 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa (This is a 22-1ot, 17.35 acre, residential subdivision, located southeast of the intersection of Angle Road SW and Chambers Avenue SW in Washington Twp.). Application 89503 of Scott M. Rohret requesting preliminary and fmal plat approval of Scott Rohret's First Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SW 1/4 of the 8E 1/4 of Section 17; Township 79 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa (Tiffs is a 1-1or, 2.34 acre, residential subdivision, located on the east side of Black Hawk Avenue SW, approximately 1/4 of a mile north of the intersection of Black Hawk Avenue SW and 400th Street SW in Hardin Twp.). Application S9504 of Betty Bream requesting preliminary and f'mal plat approval of Bream's Windy Ridge Subdivision, a subdivision located in the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 9; Township 79 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa ('Ibis is a 3-1or, 44.72 acre, residential subdivision, located on the north side of IWV Road SW, approximately 3/8 of a mile west of the intersection of IWV Road 8W and Eagle Avenue SW in Hardin b) Discussion/action re: waiving of fees for industrial rezoning for AI Streb application Z9510. c) Motion setting public hearing. d) Other _. 7. Business from the County Attorney. a) Report re: other items. To-' TOM CTTY CLERK From Board of Supervisors 3-2Z-95 8:33am p. 4 of 4 Agenda ;t-23-95 Page 3 8. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Action re: resolution to vacate all that madway and structures of the E.K. Morse Road (Road Book 4, Page 257) from near the Northeast comer of the 8outbeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27-80-5, Southerly 3300 feet. Action re: Iowa Department of Human Services Community Mental Health Center Affiliation/Waiver request. Action re: county application for Substance Abuse Funding from Iowa Department of Public Health. d) Action re: letter of support for federal housing rehabilitation funds. e) Other 9. Adjourn to informal meeting. a) Inquiries and reports from the public. b) Reports and inqukes liom the members of the Board of Supervisors. c) Report from the County Attorney. d) Other I0. Adjournment To: IO~qCI1YCLERK From: Board of Supervisors 3-Z?-95 8:32aa p. 2 of 3 John~ n Count.',' Charles D. Duffy, Chairperson Joe Bolkcom Stephen P. Lacina Don Sehr Sally Slutsman BOARD OF SUPERVISORS March 28, 1995 INFORMAL MEETING 7'O Agenda Call to order 9:00 a.m. Review of the informal minutes of March 21st recessed to March 23rd and the formal minutes of March 23rd. Business from Christal Arthur, Home Care Manager for Visiting Nurse Association re: Block Grant Flood Response Funds for Home Care Aide services/discussion. 4. Business from the County Auditor. a) Discussion m: resolution transferring from General Basic and Rural Services Basic to Secondary Roads. b) Discussion re: resolution transferring from the General Basic Fund to the Reservoir Roads Fund. c) Discussion re: resolution appropriating amounts for the tburth qum~er of Fiscal Year 1995. d) Discussion re: cash flow analysis for January and February. e) Discussion re: requesting proposals for analyses of Johnson County's computer needs and the most cost effective solutions to those needs. t) Other 913 SOUI'H DUBUQLJE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CH'Y, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000 FAX: (319) 356-6086 [ 0~ To; I06~CITVCLERK F?om: Boord of Suporvisors 3-27-gS B:32oa p, 3 of 3 Agenda 3-28-95 Page 2 5. Business from the County Attorney. a) Discussion re: job description for Secondary Roads Administrative Assistant position. b) Other 6. Business from the Board of Supervisors. a) Discussion with the County Auditor regarding minutes. b) Correspondence to the Board: 1. Letter re: county-wide "home tim exit drill" to be conducted October 15, 1995 at 7:00 p.m./discussion. c) Reports d) Other 7. Discussion from the public. 8. Recess. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: March 28, 1995 City Council City Manager Barker Financial Options - Water and Wastewater Project Over the last several weeks representatives of the Department of Finance have met with the Barkers to discuss their financing proposals as they relate to proposed water and wastewater projects. Early on, certain assumptions were made by the Barkers that did not comply with the various regulations and related financial issues. We were able to work with Barkers in order to correct those misassumptions. They have now submitted a revised financing plan that would, for all practical purposes, not be too far afield from the eadier City proposals. Certain financing option/interest rates, assumptions and project timing are different from City options/assumptions. As I have indicated on a number of occasions, the timing of construction of the project, the'bond market, and compliance schedules will also have a bearing on the final financing. A number of examples of differing opinions do exist in their proposal such as the inflation rate of 3% assumed by the Barkera, whereas we use a 4% factor. The 4% was ardved at following our most recent financial trend monitoring analysis. We believe 4% is a more realistic number. The use of the lower inflation rate will, in effect, lower the financing cost. The interest rate cost of 6.5% assumed by the Barkers is also somewhat less than the City's proposal. We have utilized a 7% factor. The bond market can, at times, be volatile and, therefore, the 7% factor which would nclude ~ssuance costs for the debt we be ieve to be a more realistic number. The Barkers are making certain assumptions on project time tables that can affect the ultimate financing package. It is difficult to cdtique the proposal on timing and thereby financing in that it is clearly a decision of the City Council with respect to the construction of the water treatment plant and the compliance schedule in place for the wastewater project. 2 Another factor utilized was population growth. We have chosen to assume that population growth will not have a direct bearing on the financing. It is difficult to substantiate the population growth for the purposes of the bond buyer, in that most of the debt will be sold to individuals and institutions that are unfamiliar with all of the growth and development issues in our comn~unity. It also makes the assumption that we will continue the growth and development activity at the current levels in our community. By not utilizing the population factor, we have in effect said that the project will be financed from the current resources, such as the strength indicators in the local economy. We believe this strengthens our overall financing package. While the Barkers' proposals have attempted to provide an option, we cannot endorse the assumptions they have proposed. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: March 28, 1995 To: City Council From: Robed Miklo, Senior Planner Re: Fringe Area Agreement The Fringe Area Subcommittee, consisting of Tom Scott and Dick Gibson of the Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission and Bob Saunders and Bill Terry of the Johnson County Zoning Commission, has been working over the past three months to revise the Fringe Area Agreement. The proposed Fringe Area Agreement is enclosed for the City Council's consideration. Additions to the version of the Fringe Area Agreement considered last year are shown in bold print. Deletions are shown as being struck over. In general, the proposed agreement has been rewsed to remove the requirement that the County down zone portions of Fringe Areas C and B; language regarding the application of City design standards to subdivisions within the City's growth area has been strengthened; and the requirement for cluster subdivisions has been emphasized. Both the Johnson County Zoning Commission and Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission have held public hearings on the proposed Fringe Area Agreement and have recommended to the Board of Supervisors and City Council that it be adopted. The City Council and Board of Supervisors will now need to schedule a joint public hearing on the proposed Fringe Area Agreement. cc: Attachment bc2-SRM _2<4' r--. PROPOSED FRINGE AREA POLICY AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON COUNTY AND IOWA CITY WHEREAS, Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (1993) allows the City of Iowa City to establish an extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, within two miles of the city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions; and WHEREAS, Chapter 354 further grants the City the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area adhere to the City's subdivision standards and conditions, unless the City establishes alternative standards and conditions for review and approval of subdivisions via a 28E agreement between the City and the County; and WHEREAS, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (1993) enables two or more local governments to enter into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and WHEREAS, the Development Policy for Rural Johnson County adopted January, 1979, calls for the preparation and adoption of development plans and agreements between the County and the City regarding the municipality and its environment; and WHEREAS, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update adopted in January, 1989, and amended through March, 1993, outlines the extent of urban development expected within the next 20 years; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of Johnson County and the City of Iowa City to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City's fringe area; and WHEREAS, Johnson County and the City of Iowa City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. FRINGE AREA DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The parties accept and agree to the following development policies regarding annexation, zoning, and subdivision review for the Iowa City fringe area as authorized by Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (1993). Purpose: The Fringe Area Policy Agreement is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to a non-urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and 'economically provide services for future growth and development. In light of these objectives, the City and the County examined the development capabilities of the Iowa City fringe area and determined that development within this fringe area is to occur in accordance with a) the Land Use Plan attached to this Agreement, b) development standards contained in Section B of this agreement, and c) the fringe area development policies contained in Section C of this Agreement. -2- March 24, 1995 A. Land Use Plan The Land Use Plan, attached to this Agreement as Attachment 1, illustrates the land use patterns for the fringe area. ...... y Development Standards The following County dcvclopment standards apply to unincorporated development in the fringe area dovclopmcnt. Discourage development in areas which conflict with the Johnson County Comprehensive Plan which considers CSR (Corn Suitability Rating), high water table, wetlands, floodplain, non-erodible soil, and road suitability. Promote development on hard surfaced roads; rely on agreements with developers to assume the cost of maintaining and upgrading existing county roads; and impose impact fees or establish special assessment districts to assure that adequate infrastructure is in place and is maintained to serve development. Protect the public health by requiring developers to meet or exceed minimum construction standards for water and wastewator systems in al~ developments within the Iowa City Fringe Area. The Johnson County Board of Health's criteria for Evaluating Water Wells in Proposed Subdivisions in effect at the time a developer seeks subdivision approval will be the guiding document in evaluating proposed water systems. All new developments must become part of the Johnson County Ohsire Wastewater Management District and adhere to the City of iowa City's Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Policy. Promote cluster development which preserves large tracts of open space including environmentally sensitive areas and farm land; results in compact development which requires less infrastructure and is more efficient for provision of services. C. Fringe Area Development Policies The parties agree to apply the following fringe area development policies. FRINGE AREA A (FORMERLY AREAS 2, 3 AND 4) Permit residential development by considering, on a case-by-case basis, proposals to rezone land in this area to RS-3 (one dwelling unit per three acres of lot area) provided all new subdivisions conform to the County's requirements for clustered developments contained in Appendix B. Lots shall not exceed one {1 ) acre in size ,ex~cept whe~'~.:t.~ City: and, ~.ounty-agree' that one {t) acre tots do: not provide a suitable Euild[ng ~ite; su~[~i'~:C.:ations, 1ot~.up"to 1,26ac~'~"in~ ~i~e~m~y'bei~ap~roved:' De~/e'lo~rnen~ comply with City Rural Design standards contained in Appendix A. If land is annexed within Fringe Area A, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of -7- Dated this day of , 1995. JOHNSON COUNTY Chairperson, Board of Supervisors By: Attest: County Auditor March 24, 1995 Approved by: County Attorney's Office Dated this .day of , 1995. CITY OF IOWA CITY By: Mayor Attest: City Clerk ATTACHIV]ENTS: Approved by: City Attorney's Office 1. Proposed Land Use Map for the Iowa City Fringe Area. 2. Figure 1: Fringe Area B (formerly Areas 5 and 6) Land Use Plan. 3. Appendix A: Definition of Standards 4. Appendix B: Cluster Subdivision Regulations ppdadmln~ffama.p~p - 3 - March 24, 1995 Iowa City, ~ow'a. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-base basis in consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA B (FORMERLY AREAS 5 AND 6) As set forth in Iowa City's recently adopted growth policy, the City will likely annex land within one mile of Iowa City to the east and within two miles of Iowa City to the south in the short-range. It is therefore consistent with the purpose of this agreement not to approve rural subdivisions within these areas of high annexation potential. Land wi';hin onc mile of Iowa City for which a final subdivision plat has not boon ...... od prior to , 1983, should bc downzoned to A 1, Rural. As -~.~. ..... zon, arc rcceivcd to develop land contiguous to and within the growth !!mits of the City, thc City will give favorable consideration to annexing this land a,qd dc~,eloping it at urban densities in conformance with the City'~" recently a..~....~ land use plan for fringe area B (Attachment 1 ), Land within onc milc of Iowa City for which a final subdivision plat has been rcccrdod prior to , 1993, will rctain its present zoning designation. Development of that land may proscod in accordance with the approved and rcccrdcd final plat. If the design of a recorded final plat does not allow rcsubdivision at an urban dcnsity and dcvclopmcnt of that subdivision has not commenced, the developer is encouraged to redesign the subdivision consistent w!th urban design standards, and to resubmit the plat for approval by the appropriatc jurisdiction(s). Land within one milo of Iowa City for which a plat of curvcy has bccn recorded prior to January 1, 1977, will retain its prcccnt zoning dc~"ignation. Development of that land may proscod in accordance with the recorded plat of survey. If the design of a rccordcd plat of survey docs not atlow rcsubdivision at an urban density and dcvclopmcnt of that plat of survey has not commcnccd, the developer is encouraged to subdivide the tract consistent with urban design standards and to submit thc subdivision plat for approval by the appropriatc jurisdiction(c). As applications are received to develop land contiguous to and within the growth limits of the city, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of this land and its development at an urban density in conformance with the City's recently adopted land use plan for Fringe Area B {Attachment 2). Subdivisions within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to urban design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and waterlines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewer treatment plant and common wells in addition to sanitary sewer and water systems which are constructed to City standards and capped. Subdivisions which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to adhere to the County's requiremerits for cluster developments, Lots shall not exceed one (1) acre in size, axeopt where the City and County agm~.that one"~ ) a~re ~ots decnet prey!de a suitable butldln~ ~!te,: In stash k~'*~'atl~ti'~; l(~t'i~i:'Upi~o t ~.~ a~res l'n sl~e: :~~ be approved. -4- March 24, 1995 Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall be consistent with the City's recently adopted land use plan for Fringe Area B (Attachment 1). On all properties outside Iowa City's projected growth area, agricultural uses are preferred. This means that land will not be rezoned to permit non-farm development. Consideration will be given to applications for single-family residential (RS or RS-3) development beyond a farmstead, provided the site is a) a minimum of one acre in size and a maximum of three acres in size, b) part of an A-1 zoned parcel which is a minimum of 40 acres in size, and c) in conformance with the County's development standards. A maximum of one parcel of 1-3 acres in size ..... ~ ~, .....per 40+ acre tract will be rezoned to RS or RS-3 to permit construction of one single-family residential dwelling provided it meets the County development standards. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area B, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-base basis in consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA C (FORMERLY AREAS 1, 7 AND 8) With the exception of thc portion of Section 20 of West Lucas Township located in the cast and south quadrants of the Highway 1 and Highway 218 intcrehango, [and in Area C which is prcscntly zoned for non farm dcvclopmcnt, and within tewa City's growth arca, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided those areas dcvclop in conformance with urban design standards. Land in Area C which is presently zoned for residential development, and within Iowa City's growth area, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided subdivisions shall conform to urban design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewer treatment plant and common wells in addition to sanitary sewer and water systems which are constructed to City standards and capped. Subdivisions which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to adhere to the County's requirements for cluster developments. Lots shall not exceed one (1) acre in size~ e~cppt wherp ~e C|tylanC[ C0unty:,'~g~'ee,.that one.(l~) a~'l'~s ~"~ pro~de a su~tab!.~: bu~d~g ~t~;:~ ~.u~h~0c~6h'~'~t~:'up~o'.l ;2~5'~'~' i~:~:~iZ~"~. '~ be Upon annexation to Iowa City, commercial and/or industrial development is encouraged in the portion of Section 20 of West Lucas Township that is located in the east and south quadrants of the Highway 1 and Highway 218 interchange. It is therefore consistent with the purpose of this agreement not to approve commercial and/or industrial developments within this area prior to annexation. - 5 - March 24, 1995 To further the goals of this Agroomont, undovolopod, non oommoroially zonod land, ac illustratcd in rod on the aooompanying Land Use Plan, should bo rozonod to A 1, Rurc,~ As applications are received to develop land contiguous to Iowa City and within this portion of the City's growth limits, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of this land and its development for commercial and/or industrial uses consistent with urban development patterns. In the portions of Area C which are not within iowa City's growth area and which are zoned for non-farm development, development may occur but only in conformance with the County's cluster subdivision requirements. Development must comply with City Rural Design Standards. 3. The land in Area C currently zoned A-l, Rural, will not be rezoned for non-farm purposes unless: a) b) the land is annexed to Iowa City, or for residential purposes, the site (1) is a minimum of one acre in size and a maximum of three acres in size, (2) is part of an A-1 zoned parcel which is a minimum of 40 acres in size, and (3) conforms with the County's development standards. A maximum of one parcel of 1-3 acres in size per 40 + acre tract will be rezoned to RS or RS-3 to permit construction of one single-family residential dwelling provided it meets the County development standards. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area C, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions which it exercises pursuant to iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-base basis in consultation with Johnson County. SECTION I1. ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES As a rule, zoning regulation is the county's prerogative if a county has adopted a zoning ordinance. The City, however, exercises authority over subdivision regulation in a city's fringe area. Annexation is also primarily under exclusive rule of cities. Each of these activities, however, affects both jurisdictions and produces a clear need for coordination and joint administration. To that end, the City of Iowa City and Johnson County agree to the following procedures for administration of land use regulations. A. Zoninq Regulation: Zoning regulation for all unincorporated territory will remain under the authority of the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance and the provisions of Chapter 335, Code of iowa (1993), the enabling legislation for the County's zoning powers. 2. Measures outlinod in this Agreement whioh rcquiro rezoning of specific areas shall bo undertaken within one (1) yoar of adoption of this Agrcemont. The County will forward each request for rezoning of property within the Fringe Areas specified in this Agreement to the City for review and comment prior to the public hearing before the County Zoning Commission. Any zoning change will conform with the policies identified for the Area in which the property is located. -6~ March 24,1995 B. Subdivision Ret~ulation: Subdivision of land within Iowa City's fringe area will be required to conform to either City Rural Design Standards or the City Urban Design Standards in accordance with the policies specified in this Agreement. Persons wishing to subdivide land within the fringe area specified in this Agreement shall be required to simultaneously file a subdivision application with both the City and the County. The City and the County shall coordinate the processing of the application to ensure concurrent review by both the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the County Zoning Commission. 4 Subdivisions of land into less than three lots will continue to be regulated by the County. C. Annexation: 1. Iowa City will annex territory only in accordance with the policy statements specified in this Agreement. The City will, upon receipt, forward applications requesting annexation or severance (de&nnexation) of property within the fringe area specified in this Agreement to the County for review and comment prior to consideration by the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. SECTION III. AGREEMENT REVIEW Every three (3) years during the term of this Agreement, either the Chair of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City of Iowa City shall initiate review of the policies of this Agreement by contacting the other party to this Agreement. Both parties to this Agreement shall consider modifications of this Agreement, as appropriate. SECTION IV, EFFECTIVE PERIOD This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance and execution by the parties, and shall be in effect until {21 years). This Agreement may be modified and extended by the written mutual consent of the parties. SECTION V. RECORDATION This Agreement shall be filed with the Secretary of the State of Iowa, and with the Johnson County Recorder in compliance with Chapter 28E, Code of Iowa (1993). J I/ , LEGEND Residential (RS or RS 3) Agricultural Commercial or Indu$~'rial COR~ LAND USE CONCEPT PLAN Figure 1 .f APPENDIX A Definition of Standards City Urban Desiqn Standards: Those standards enumerated in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City which the City imposes on any subdivision within the corporate limits of Iowa City. City Rural Desiqn Standards: 1.O Streets 1.1 Streets shall be designed for a minimum surface width of:22 feet. Curb and gutter will not be required. 1.2 The right-of-way for local streets without curb and gutter shall be 60 feet to enable retrofit of sewer, water, and sidewalk in the future as necessary; otherwise, the right- of-way for local streets with curb and gutter and storm sewer shall be 50 feet. The right-of-way for arterial, industrial, and collector streets for the developed area shall be determined in conjunction with the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1.3 The maximum street grade for local streets shall be 12%. 1.4 The pavement cross section for all pavements will be a 2% parabolic crown. This cross slope is equivalent to 'A-inch per foot. 1.5 The pavement slab shall be constructed of a 6" rolled stone base and a 22-foot wide chipseal surface. 1.6 Minimum corner radii shall be 20 feet. 1.7 The minimum ditch grade shall be 1.0%. In addition, it will be necessary to place a 12-inch diameter (minimum) culvert, either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe, through all drive approaches constructed over a drainage ditch. The exact size of pipe required will be a function of the area to be drained. 1.8 Drive approaches shall be hard surfaced within the right-of-way. 2.0 Water Distribution System 2.1 Well(s) shall conform to the requirements of the Johnson County Health Department and the distribution system, if installed, (water main) shall be either ductile cast iron pipe (ANSI A21.50 manufactured in accordance with ANSI A21.50) or poly vinyl chloride pipe (PVC-ASTM D1784, Type 1, Grade 1,200 psi design stress and SDR of 17 or less). 2.2 It shall be the responsibility of the Developer's Engineer to establish a fire rating for the area being developed. Prior to plat approval, there shall be a letter of transmittal from the appropriate Fire Protection District approving spacing, location, number of fire hydrants, size of mains, pressure, etc. 2.3 Connection to the City of Iowa City Water Distribution System is subject to City Council consideration based on availability. Generally, annexation is a criterion which must be met. 3.0 Sanitary Sewer All methods of sanitation shall conform to the 1989 Johnson County Board of Health Rules and Regulations Governing On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems and to the 1990 Iowa City Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Policy. 4.0 Storm Sewers : 4.1 With the exception of developments located in the Old Man's Creek watershed, the City Storm Water Management Ordinance shall apply to new developments located outside the City limits of Iowa City but within the City's fringe area. 4.2 All storm sewers shall conform to revised Section VII (Storm Sewers) of the Design Standards for Public Works Improvements in Iowa City, Iowa. 4.3 Culverts shall be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter; either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe (minimum gauge 18 and corrugations 2'xY2", 2¥~"x ¥2 ", and 3"x1") shall be used. Culverts shall conform to the Standard Specifications for Hiqhwav and Brid~e Construction, Series of 1977. Minimum cover over the top of culvert shall be six inches. 5.0 Underqround Utilities 5.1 Whenever a subdivision shall be laid out such that a new street is required, telephone and electric utilities shall be underground. It is not intended that small subdivisions which would use an existing county road would follow this requirement since overhead utilities are probably directly adjacent to the property. APPENDIX B 8:1.22: Cluster Subdivision Regulations X. Cluster Subdivisions. Purpose: This article is intended to permit the development of cluster subdivisions in which buildings and dwellings are grouped together. The concept of clustering will provide for a flexibility in subdivision design to fit the natural characteristics of the land and will permit more usable open space, common ground and recreational areas. The provisions of this article shall not be construed to apply to any other article of chapter 8:1. However, all other articles of chapter 8:1 apply to cluster subdivisions unless exempted by this article. Exceptions and Applications: The dis. trict requirements may be varied provided that adequate open space shall be includad to insure that the average land area per family dwelling shall be equal to or greater than that permitted for the district in which the development is located. The following provisions apply: Open space, common ground, or recreational areas shall be provided for the use and benefit of the family dwelling units in the development. All cluster lots must abut or have direct access to open space, common ground, or recreational areas. The total land area of the development divided by the total number of family dwelling units provides an average land area per family dwelling unit. Total land area of the development shall include all open space, common ground, and recreation areas, but shall not include land set aside for ponds and lakes within the subdivision, or the traffic surface area of subdivision roads. At no time shall approval be granted to developments which include lots containing less than 50 percent of the lot area required, unless such a development is in an RS-3 District. Developments in an RS-3 District may include lots containing less than 50 percent of the required lot area, but not less than one (1) acre, provided that such developments utilize a "public water supply system," as defined by Chapter 455B.171 (19), Iowa Code (1987). All systems are to be considered public water systems, but when a development has less than fifteen (15) service connections or regularly serves less than twenty-five (25) individuals, permitting and monitoring will be in accordance with requirements prescribed by the Johnson County Board of Health. Open Space Covenants: As a condition of approving the cluster subdivision and permitting exceptions to the standard subdivision requirements, the subdivider shall submit with his final plat a subdivider's agreement regarding the liability for and maintenance of the open space, common ground or recreation areas. ppdadmin~subregs.apb